Modeling of Hydrogen Electrochemical Processes With ANSYS-Fluent - Javier León Juan Universidad Barcelona

Treball de Fi de Grau
Grau en Enginyeria en Tecnologies Industrials
Modeling of Hydrogen Electrochemical

Processes with ANSYS-Fluent
REPORT
Author: Javier León Juan

Supervisor: Elisabet Mas de Les Valls Ortiz
Call: September 2023
Escola Tècnica Superior

d’Enginyeria Industrial de Barcelona
Page 2 Report
Modeling of Hydrogen Electrochemical Processes with ANSYS-Fluent Page 3
Resum
El present projecte té com a objectiu comprendre la simulació de PEM (membranes
d'intercanvi protònic) tant en cel·les de combustible com en processos d'electròlisi
utilitzant el software Ansys Fluent. Per començar, s'ha donat prioritat a la simulació de
cel·les de combustible PEMFC a causa de l'abundància de literatura disponible per a
consultar. En aquest punt, s'ha optat per utilitzar un model híbrid que permet simular tant
cel·les de combustible com processos electrolítics.
No obstant això, s'han trobat diversos reptes, com la manca d'inicialització en la simulació
i la persistent aparició de singularitats numèriques, la qual cosa ha portat a la decisió de
centrar les simulacions en PEMFC. Un cop obtingudes simulacions útils de PEMFC, es
procedeix a realitzar una corba de polarització per verificar l'obtenció de resultats
coherents. A més, es duu a terme un estudi de l'efecte de la tensió sobre la temperatura
de la membrana, amb l'objectiu de proporcionar bases per a futurs estudis orientats a
millorar l'eficiència i durabilitat.
Finalment, es realitza un estudi bibliogràfic de 60 articles relacionats amb la dinàmica de

fluids computacional i electròlisi dels últims cinc anys. Aquest anàlisi revela que el
software Ansys és el més àmpliament utilitzat, cobrint més del 50% dels informes
examinats. A més, es duu a terme un estudi de gènere amb els articles buscats que
destaca una minoria de dones en aquest camp. Es proposen polítiques específiques per
fomentar la inclusió i participació de les dones en aquesta àrea.
Page 4 Report
Resumen
El presente proyecto tiene como objetivo comprender la simulación de PEM (membranas
de intercambio protónico) tanto en celdas de combustible como en procesos de
electrólisis utilizando el software Ansys Fluent. Para iniciar, se ha dado prioridad a la
simulación de celdas de combustible PEMFC debido a la abundante literatura disponible
para consultar. En este punto, se ha optado por utilizar un modelo híbrido que permite
simular tanto celdas de combustible como procesos electrolíticos.
Sin embargo, se han encontrado diversos desafíos, como la falta de inicialización en la

simulación y la persistente aparición de singularidades numéricas, lo que ha llevado a la
decisión de centrar las simulaciones en PEMFC. Una vez obtenidas simulaciones útiles
de PEMFC, se procede a realizar una curva de polarización para verificar la obtención de
resultados coherentes. Además, se lleva a cabo un estudio del efecto de la tensión sobre
la temperatura de la membrana, con el objetivo de proporcionar bases para futuros
estudios orientados a mejorar la eficiencia y durabilidad.
Finalmente, se realiza un estudio bibliográfico de 60 artículos relacionados con la

dinámica de fluidos computacional y electrólisis de los últimos cinco años. Este análisis
revela que el software Ansys es el más ampliamente utilizado, abarcando más del 50%
de los informes examinados. Además, se lleva a cabo un estudio de género con los
artículos buscados que destaca una minoría de mujeres en este campo. Se proponen
políticas específicas para fomentar la inclusión y participación de mujeres en esta área
Abstract
The present project aims to understand the simulation of Proton Exchange Membranes
(PEMs) in both fuel cells and electrolysis processes using Ansys Fluent software. To start,
priority has been given to simulating PEM fuel cells due to the abundant available
literature for reference. At this point, a hybrid model has been chosen, allowing for the
simulation of both fuel cells and electrolytic processes.
However, several challenges have been encountered, such as the lack of initialization in
the simulation and the persistent occurrence of numerical singularities. This has led to the
decision to focus the simulations on PEM fuel cells. Once useful simulations of PEMFC
are obtained, a polarization curve is generated to verify the consistency of the results.
Additionally, a study of the effect of voltage on membrane temperature is conducted,
aiming to provide a basis for future studies aimed at improving efficiency and durability.
Finally, a literature review of 60 articles related to computational fluid dynamics and

electrolysis from the last five years is carried out. This analysis reveals that Ansys
software is the most widely used, covering over 50% of the examined reports.
Furthermore, a gender study is conducted with the searched articles, highlighting a
minority of women in this field. Specific policies are proposed to promote the inclusion and
participation of women in this area.
Page 6 Report
Contingut
RESUM ______________________________________________________ 3
RESUMEN ___________________________________________________ 4
ABSTRACT___________________________________________________ 5
CONTINGUT __________________________________________________ 7
ABBREVATIONS AND SYMBOLS _______________________________ 10
LIST OF FIGURES ____________________________________________ 11
LIST OF TABLES _____________________________________________ 13
1. INTRODUCTION __________________________________________ 16
1.1. Motivation ..................................................................................................... 16
1.2. Scope ........................................................................................................... 17
1.3. Prerequisites ................................................................................................ 17
1.4. Objectives .................................................................................................... 18
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND _____________________________ 19

2.1. What electrolysis is? .................................................................................... 19
2.2. Types of electrolysis..................................................................................... 20
2.2.1. Alkaline electrolysis ......................................................................................... 20
2.2.2. Polymeric exchange membrane (PEM)........................................................... 21
2.2.3. Anion exchange membrane (AEM) ................................................................. 22
2.2.4. Solid oxide electrolyzer cell (SOEC)................................................................ 23
2.3. State of the art.............................................................................................. 24
2.4. ANSYS Fluent’s Fuel Cell and electrolysis model ....................................... 26
2.4.1. Equations ........................................................................................................ 26
2.4.2. Electrochemistry Modeling .............................................................................. 27
2.4.3. Current and mass conservation ...................................................................... 29
2.4.4. Heat Source .................................................................................................... 30
2.4.5. Liquid Water Formation, Transport, and its Effects ......................................... 31
2.4.6. Properties........................................................................................................ 32
2.5. CFD simulation process in Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) fuel cells .. 35
2.5.1. Geometry and mesh........................................................................................ 35
2.5.2. Simulation: model and boundary conditions .................................................... 36
2.5.3. Results analysis .............................................................................................. 37
3. SIMULATIONS OF PEMFC IN ANSYS-FLUENT_________________ 39

3.1. Methodology ................................................................................................ 39
Page 8 Report
3.2. Learning concepts. First simulation ............................................................. 40

3.2.1. Geometry ........................................................................................................ 40
3.2.2. Mesh ............................................................................................................... 41
3.2.3. Set up.............................................................................................................. 42
3.2.3.1. Model options ....................................................................................... 42
3.2.3.2. Model parameters ................................................................................ 43
3.2.3.3. Current collectors ................................................................................. 44
3.2.3.4. Gas Diffusion Layers ............................................................................ 44
3.2.3.5. Catalyst Layers..................................................................................... 45
3.2.3.6. Electrolyte............................................................................................. 45
3.2.4. Boundary conditions........................................................................................ 45
3.2.4.1. Flow...................................................................................................... 45
3.2.4.2. Walls .................................................................................................... 46

3.2.5. Solution ........................................................................................................... 47
3.2.6. Conclusions .................................................................................................... 48
3.3. The search of convergence. Second simulation .......................................... 49
3.3.1. Geometry ........................................................................................................ 49
3.3.2. Mesh ............................................................................................................... 49
3.3.2.1. MEA refinement.................................................................................... 50
3.3.2.2. Channel refinement .............................................................................. 51
3.3.2.3. Global vision of the mesh ..................................................................... 52

3.3.3. Boundary Conditions ....................................................................................... 52
3.3.4. Set Up and solutions ....................................................................................... 53
3.3.5. Conclusions .................................................................................................... 54
3.4. Third Iteration: Simplified Simulation............................................................ 54
3.4.1. Modifications ................................................................................................... 55
3.4.2. Simulation and results ..................................................................................... 56
3.4.3. Conclusions .................................................................................................... 57
3.5. Refined mesh: Fourth simulation ................................................................. 58
3.5.1. Mesh ............................................................................................................... 58
3.5.2. Simulation and results ..................................................................................... 59
3.5.3. Mesh verification ............................................................................................. 61
3.5.4. Conclusions .................................................................................................... 63
3.6. Succesful Simulation: The last iteration. ...................................................... 63
3.6.1. Geometry ........................................................................................................ 64
3.6.2. Mesh ............................................................................................................... 64
3.6.3. Set Up: Models and boundary conditions ........................................................ 64
3.6.4. Initialization and solution ................................................................................. 65

3.6.5. Results ............................................................................................................ 65
3.6.5.1. Temperature ......................................................................................... 66
3.6.5.2. Current density ..................................................................................... 67
4. DISCUSSION ____________________________________________ 68
4.1. Mass Flow Behaviour................................................................................... 68
4.2. Temperatures at the MEA ............................................................................ 69
4.3. Electric potential ........................................................................................... 71
4.3.1.1. Polarization Curve ................................................................................ 73
4.3.1.2. Study of temperature ............................................................................ 74
5. ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT _________________________________ 76

6. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ___________________________ 79
7. SOCIAL AND GENDER EQUALITY ASSESSMENT______________ 81
8. CONCLUSIONS __________________________________________ 83
9. APPRECIATIONS _________________________________________ 84
10. BIBLIOGRAPHY __________________________________________ 85
Page 10 Report
Abbrevations and Symbols

TFG: Treball fi de grau
CFD: Computational Fluid Dynamics
PEM: Polymeric Exchange Membrane
PEMFC: Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell.
PEMEC: Proton Exchange Membrane Electrolyzer Cell
SOEC: Solid Oxide Electrolysis Cell
MEA: Membrane Electrode Assembly
gdl: gas diffusion layers
T: Temperature (K)
Re: Reynolds (dimensionless)

List of figures
Fig. 1. Topics of the articles ............................................................................................. 25
Fig. 2. Software statistics ................................................................................................. 26
Fig. 3. Boundary conditions............................................................................................. 27
Fig. 4. Frontal view of the study cell ................................................................................ 35
Fig. 5. Steps to follow to simulate .................................................................................... 38
Fig. 6. Geometry of the first cell ...................................................................................... 40
Fig. 7. Mesh num.1.......................................................................................................... 42
Fig. 8. Model options in the fuel cell and electrolysis model ............................................ 42
Fig. 9. Flow channel schematic ....................................................................................... 46
Fig. 10. Front view of the MEA’s refinement. In order from top to bottom: anode gdl,
anode catalyst, membrane, cathode catalyst, cathode gdl .............................................. 48
Fig. 11.Side view of the MEA's refinement. In order from top to bottom: anode gdl, anode
catalyst, membrane, cathode catalyst, cathode gdl ......................................................... 48
Fig. 12. New mesh quality criteria ................................................................................... 50
Fig. 13. MEA refinement for second simulation ............................................................... 51
Fig. 14. Anode inlet mesh ............................................................................................... 51
Fig. 15. Global vision of the second mesh....................................................................... 52
Fig. 16. Modified mass flow direction .............................................................................. 53
Fig. 17. New boundary conditions ................................................................................... 55
Fig. 18. Temperature distribution in the middle of the cell ............................................... 56
Fig. 19. Electrolyte mesh used ........................................................................................ 57
Fig. 20. Corner of the membrane in isometric view ......................................................... 58
Fig. 21. Third mesh ......................................................................................................... 59

Page 12 Report
Fig. 22. Temperature at the middle of the geometry ....................................................... 60
Fig. 23.Velocity profiles ................................................................................................... 60
Fig. 24. Temperatures of the iteration 1 .......................................................................... 62
Fig. 27. Isometric view of thermal distribution in the PEMFC ........................................... 66
Fig. 28. Current flux density of PEMFC ........................................................................... 67
Fig. 29. Hydrogen mass fraction on anode channel ........................................................ 68
Fig. 30. Oxygen mass fraction on cathode channel ........................................................ 69
Fig. 31. Water mass fraction on cathode channel ........................................................... 69
Fig. 32. Temperatures along the cell ............................................................................... 70
Fig. 33.Temperatures at the middle of the cell ................................................................ 71
Fig. 34.Contributions of the losses to the polarization curve[1] ....................................... 74
Fig. 35. Evolution of MEA temperatures.......................................................................... 75
Fig. 36. Enviromental contribution of materials and processes [13] ................................ 79
Fig. 37.Gender distribution .............................................................................................. 81

List of tables
Table 1.Comparative of the different types of electrolysis ............................................... 20
Table 2.Parts of the fuel cell in Fig. 4 .............................................................................. 36
Table 3. Dimensions of the first cell................................................................................. 41
Table 4.Electrochemistry parameters.............................................................................. 43
Table 5. Collector-default properties ............................................................................... 44
Table 6. Difflayer-default properties ................................................................................ 44
Table 7. Catalyst-default properties ................................................................................ 45
Table 8. Electrolyte-default properties ............................................................................. 45
Table 9. Mass flow inlets ................................................................................................. 46
Table 10. Walls boundary conditions .............................................................................. 47
Table 11.Summary of the simulation 1 ............................................................................ 48
Table 12. Geometry of the second cell............................................................................ 49
Table 13. Quality of the second mesh. Nodes: 424,670.................................................. 52
Table 14. Reynolds calculation ....................................................................................... 53
Table 15. Summary of the simulation 2 ........................................................................... 54
Table 16. Copper properties ........................................................................................... 55
Table 17. Summary of the simulation 3 ........................................................................... 57
Table 18. Quality of the third mesh ................................................................................. 59
Table 19. Reynolds calculus ........................................................................................... 61
Table 20. Description of the flows for iteration 1.............................................................. 61

Page 14 Report
Table 23. Calculated values at each iteration.................................................................. 72
Table 24. Polarization curve ............................................................................................ 73
Table 25. Experimental costs .......................................................................................... 76
Table 26. CFD costs ....................................................................................................... 77
Table 27. Economic budget ............................................................................................ 78
Table 28. Ecological impact of recycled materials ........................................................... 80

Page 16 Report
1. Introduction
1.1. Motivation
At the end of 2022, I was a Thermodynamics student, and Elisabet was my professor. In
one of her final classes, she explained the possibility of approaching the work by focusing
on the topic of electrolysis, either through experimentation or simulations. Electrolysis
piqued my interest, as although I had heard about it, I didn't have a precise understanding
of what it entailed. Intrigued by this subject, I sent her an email expressing my interest,
and in January 2023, I met with her to delve deeper into the matter and a review the latest
experiment of a student focused on alkaline electrolysis.
At that time, we decided to tackle the study of electrolysis in polymeric electrolyte

membranes (PEMs) through Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD). CFD is the field of
knowledge that deals with the numerical simulation of fluid flows, heat transfer, and other
phenomena such as chemical reactions, achieved by combining fluid mechanics and
numerical computation. Also, we decided to use ANSYS-Fluent fuel cell and electrolysis
model to get an overview of its potentialities and limitations.
The choice to focus on Proton Exchange Membrane Cells for this project is grounded in
their remarkable technological relevance and significant impact on the current energy
landscape [1]. These cells represent advancement in the quest for cleaner and more
efficient energy sources, making them a field of research and development in constant
evolution. Furthermore, I like the topic due to its strategic relevance in terms of energy
consumption/production, as I believe there is a great need in the world to create cleaner
energy.. Additionally, the opportunity to apply the knowledge acquired throughout my
academic career in fields such as chemistry, fluid mechanics, and thermodynamics
provides enrichment to my academic formation.
1.2. Scope
The scope of the project involves successfully simulating a PEMFC cell with
ANSYS.Fluent 2023R1 and with all its components: the electrolyte or membrane, the
catalysts, the gas diffusion layers, the air flow, the hydrogen flow and the current
collectors. No simulations will be conducted with cooling channels. Additionally, it is
important to note that the channels will always be arranged in the same direction and will
have a square cross-section. Despite the model to simulate an electrolyser has been
studied and many literature contributions analysed, the applied study is limited to fuel cell
limitations with ANSYS. The reasoning behind this limitation is the uncertainties founded
in fuel cell simulation that indicate that a long term study needs to be performs
1.3. Prerequisites
The equipment used for the simulations is the MSI Prestige 14 A11SC-005XES laptop.
Among other characteristics of this computer, noteworthy features include: the Windows
11 operating system, an Intel Core i7 – 1185G7 processor and 16GB of RAM.
The geometry of the cells was created using SolidWorks software in its 2022 Standard
version, available on the computers provided by the Escola Tecnica Superior d’Enginyers
Industrials de Barcelona for its students.
Finally, for all the simulations conducted throughout the project, ANSYS-Fluent software
was used in its 2023R1 version with a student license. It's worth noting the use of this
license, as it restricts the maximum number of nodes in the mesh to 512,000.
Page 18 Report
1.4. Objectives
The primary objective of this project is to perform detailed simulations of a PEM

electrolyser and, alternatively, a PEM fuel cell using ANSYS-Fluent. These simulations
will encompass a comprehensive analysis of fluid flow, current density and temperatures
within the Membrane Electrode Assembly (MEA).
To reach the ultimate goal, smaller objectives have been outlined:
• Investigation of the various types of electrolysis found in nature and their

characteristics
• Conduct a bibliographic study of scientific articles from recent years related to

different types of electrolysis, particularly focusing on CFD simulations, to
determine which software is most commonly used for this type of simulation today.
• Once the software is selected, achieve a successful simulation of a PEMFC cell

using an iterative method, attempting to improve aspects of failed simulations and
analysing the reasons for these errors.
• Once the basic simulation is obtained, modify the electrical potential of the cell and
analyse the obtained polarization curve and the MEA temperature difference as a
function of the cell voltage
• Evaluate the representation of women and men in the field of electrolysis, thus
contributing to gender awareness in the scientific field.
• Provide a detailed cost estimate for the resources needed to carry out a CFD
simulation project.
• Conduct a comprehensive study on the environmental impact associated with

PEM cells.
2. Theoretical Background
2.1. What electrolysis is?
Electrolysis is a chemical reaction in which an electric current is used to drive a

non-spontaneous chemical reaction. In electrolysis, an electrolyte, which is a
substance that can conduct electricity, is used as the medium for the chemical
reaction.
When an electric current is passed through an electrolyte, it causes the substance

to dissociate into its constituent ions. The ions are then attracted to the electrodes,
which are connected to a power source, and undergo chemical reactions at the
surface of the electrodes.
For example, in the electrolysis of water, an electric current is passed through a

solution of water and an electrolyte, such as sodium hydroxide. The water
molecules dissociate into hydrogen ions (H+) and hydroxide ions (OH-). The
hydrogen ions are attracted to the negatively charged cathode, where they gain
electrons and form hydrogen gas (H2). The hydroxide ions are attracted to the
positively charged anode, where they lose electrons and form oxygen gas (O2).
Electrolysis is used in various industrial processes, such as the production of

aluminium, and copper. Electrolysis can also be used for water treatment and the
purification of metals.
Moreover, electrolysis of water allows to produce hydrogen using clean and

renewable energy sources, such as solar or wind energy. As awareness of climate
change and the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions increases, hydrogen
production through electrolysis is considered an alternative to fossil fuels and
contributes to the transition towards a more sustainable economy.
The four most common types of electrolysis are: alkaline electrolysis, PEM
(Proton Exchange Membrane), AEM (Anion Exchange Membrane) electrolysis,
and SOEC (Solid Oxide Electrolysis Cell) electrolysis.
Page 20 Report
Alkaline PEM AEM SOEC
Temperature 60°C-80°C 50°C-80°C 80°C 900°C-1200°C
Efficiency 62%-82% 80% 60%-75% 80%
Costs 370-800 €/kW 250-1270 €/kW 450-550 €/kW 625 €/kW
Table 1.Comparative of the different types of electrolysis
As can be seen in Table 1, a comparison is presented among different electrolysis

and fuel cell technologies, considering three key parameters: operating
temperature, efficiency, and costs. In terms of operating temperature, both
alkaline electrolysis, PEM (Proton Exchange Membrane), and AEM (Anion
Exchange Membrane) typically operate at relatively low temperatures, while
SOEC (Solid Oxide Electrolysis Cell) operates at much higher temperatures in
comparison. Regarding efficiency, SOEC and PEM electrolysis stand out with an
efficiency value of 80%, reflecting their effectiveness in energy conversion. In
contrast, alkaline and AEM technologies exhibit a range of efficiency values, this
can depend on various factors such as operating conditions and specific design.
Regarding costs, it is noted that both alkaline and PEM technologies currently
exhibit a broad range of pricing. This variation could be attributed to the diverse
array of configurations and materials available in the market.
The electrolyser that is most commonly utilized relies on alkaline stacks due to
their affordability and established technology. However, there is a growing interest
in PEM electrolysis because it is more compact, environmentally friendly, and can
be easily integrated with renewable energy sources. Additionally, SOEC and AEM
technologies are emerging as potentially viable options in the medium term, each
with their own set of advantages
2.2. Types of electrolysis
2.2.1. Alkaline electrolysis
Alkaline electrolysis of water is one of the main technologies, along with PEM electrolysis.
It is the most mature and economical technology due to its development over the years.
Its efficiency ranges from 62-82%, being higher when increasing the size of the
electrolyser [2].
In a conventional alkaline electrolyser, there are an anode and a cathode, usually made of
nickel, with a separator between the chambers of both electrodes. The separator is
permeable to hydroxide ions and water molecules. To operate in an alkaline environment,
an electrolyte such as potassium hydroxide (KOH) is added, typically with a concentration
of around 30% in KOH. The objective is to displace the anode reaction towards oxygen
formation. Hydrogen bubbles are formed at the cathode, while oxygen is collected in the
anode.
𝐴𝑛𝑜𝑑𝑒: 4 𝑂𝐻 − (𝑎𝑞) → 2 𝐻2 𝑂(𝑙) + 4𝑒 − (1)
𝐶𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑑𝑒: 4𝐻2 𝑂(𝑙) + 4𝑒 − → 2 𝐻2(𝑔) + 4 𝑂𝐻 − (𝑎𝑞) (2)
In the configuration of immersion electrodes, hydrogen and oxygen are separated by a

gas-impermeable membrane that divides the cell. However, gas bubbles that form on the
electrodes reduce their active surface, causing resistance to the electrolyte. When high
current densities are applied, the bubble flow increases and covers a significant part of the
electrode, making this configuration impractical for large-scale construction.
The second configuration, with porous electrodes, eliminates the bubble problem using a
fine cellulose filter that absorbs and confines the bubbles between two hydrophilic
separators, which are pressurized by the anode and cathode. The use of porous is
minimising resistance to dissolution.
In this latter configuration, each electrode consists of a nickel net and a layer of nickel or
stainless steel gas diffusion material. The system also includes pipes for gas transport
and electrolyte purging which can be filtered.
2.2.2. Polymeric exchange membrane (PEM)
PEM electrolysis is based on the conduction of protons through a membrane, made of a

fluorinated and sulphated polymers [2]. The membrane thickness is in the range of 25 to
250 μm.
The components of a PEM electrolyser are the membrane, the electrodes with catalysts
(platinum and iridium, usually) and the gas diffusion layers (GDL) whose function is to
provide a path for the gases between electrodes and flow channels and transmit heat
during operation in the electrochemical cell.
The ion-conducting polymers that form the membrane have two functions: to transport the
electrical charges between anode and cathode and to separate the products formed at
each electrode. Water is consumed at the anode to form oxygen. The proton formed is
surrounded by water molecules and is electrically transferred across the membrane. Once
the proton is located at the cathode, the reaction of formation of hydrogen from two
protons takes place.
Page 22 Report
1
𝐴𝑛𝑜𝑑𝑒: 𝐻2 𝑂 → 𝑂 + 2𝐻 + + 2𝑒 − (3)
2 2(𝑔)
+
𝐶𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑑𝑒: 2 𝐻(𝑎𝑞) + 2𝑒 − → 𝐻2 (𝑔) (4)
The membrane, being treated with an acid ionomer, means that the use of catalysts is
limited to rare transition metals such as radium, iridium and the more commonly used
platinum.
Two plates, usually made of titanium, are used to delimit the electrochemical cell.
Between them is the MEA (Membrane Electrode Assembly), the membrane and electrode
assembly. The water flows through the machined channels between the titanium plates.
The two-phase water-oxygen mixture flows through the anode and the water-hydrogen
mixture through the cathode.
Between the titanium plates and the MEA there is a gap occupied by current collectors.
Their purpose is to transmit electricity from the titanium plates to each side of the MEA. In
addition, their porosity allows liquid water and gases to pass through.
If we compare the electrolysis PEM with the alkaline, it has a lower degree of
development. Currently, PEM electrolysis has a lower output and its service life is more
limited. However, the response speeds are much faster in PEM technology and having
smaller cells and a solid electrolyte, such as the membrane, simplifies and lowers later
stages of the hydrogen treatment.
2.2.3. Anion exchange membrane (AEM)
The AEM electrolysis separates water into hydrogen and oxygen by means of a
membrane as happens in the PEM electrolysis, but in this case the membrane is anionic.
This allows hydroxyl ions to diffuse through the membrane to the anode section; while
electrons are transported by an external circuit to the anode where the formation of the
hydrogen molecule occurs [2].
If you look at the reactions that take place in the AEM they are similar to those produced
in alkaline electrolysis. But instead of using a liquid electrolyte, it uses a membrane. This
makes the AEM electrolysis much more compact. At the same time, a medium with an
excessively high concentration as in the alkaline is not necessary either, but is currently
using solutions at 1% K2CO3.
𝐴𝑛𝑜𝑑𝑒: 4 𝑂𝐻 − (𝑎𝑞) → 𝑂2(𝑔) + 2 𝐻2 𝑂(𝑙) + 4𝑒 − (5)
𝐶𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑑𝑒: 4𝐻2 𝑂(𝑙) + 4𝑒 − → 2 𝐻2(𝑔) + 4 𝑂𝐻 − (𝑎𝑞) (6)

Water enters through the anode, reaches the cathode, is reduced and forms hydrogen
and hydroxyl ions thanks the contribution of electrons. The positive attraction anode
causes hydroxyl ions to diffuse to across the membrane to the anodic side of cell. The
anodic reaction consists of recombination of hydroxyl ions to form water and oxygen.
The AEM technology combines the principles of the two previously explained
technologies: alkaline electrolysis and PEM. This type of electrolysis tries to take
advantage of both. It should be noted that it is currently in a state of development, having
not reached the industrialization of either of the two electrolysis on which it is based.
2.2.4. Solid oxide electrolyzer cell (SOEC)
Solid oxide electrolysis has a fundamental difference from the three other typologies:
operating temperature, which is in the range 800-1000 ºC. This high temperature
makes efficiencies higher because the electricity consumption is lower [2].
At this temperature, feeding water to the Electrolyser is made in the form of

superheated steam. When in contact with the cathode is reduces, leading to hydrogen
gas and anions oxygen. At this moment, the solid oxides, which act as an electrolyte,
such as separator between the two sides of the cell and as an ion conductor. Oxygen
ions migrate to the anode, where the formation reaction take place oxygen gas. In the
anodic reaction are obtained also electrons, which will circulate through circuit
external, becoming reducers in the reaction anodic on the other side.
1
𝐴𝑛𝑜𝑑𝑒: 𝑂2− (𝑎𝑞) → 𝑂 + 2𝑒 − (7)
2 2(𝑔)
𝐶𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑑𝑒: 𝐻2 𝑂(𝑔) + 2𝑒 − → 𝐻2 (𝑔) + 𝑂2− (𝑎𝑞) (8)
When working at high temperatures an electrolyte that is good ionic conductor is needed,
for this reason zirconia (ZrO2) electrolytes are used. The main components of a cell of this
type of electrolysis are the stainless steel bipolar plates and the manganite coating the
electrolyte. In the cathode, mainly “cernets”, alloys of metals and ceramic materials,
containing nickel and zirconium are used.
It should be noted that it is still maturing industrial, being less developed than the alkaline
or polymer.
Page 24 Report
2.3. State of the art
The preliminary study before starting the simulations is a crucial stage to understand the
current state of research in the field of electrolysis and polymer electrolyte membrane fuel
cells (PEMFC and PEMEC), as well as solid oxide electrolyzer cells (SOEC) and
computational fluid dynamics (CFD).
To carry out this study, a total of 60 articles published in the last 5 years were analysed.
The search was conducted through Google Scholar; a search engine specialized in
academic documents. Specific keywords such as "PEMFC" (Polymeric Exchange
Membrane Fuel Cell), "PEMEC" (Polymeric Exchange Membrane Electrolysis), "SOEC”
(Solid Oxide Electrolyser Cell),” ALKALINE" and "CFD" (Computational Fluid Dynamics)
were used to identify relevant articles.
In this state of the art, the thematic areas addressed by each of the studies are examined,
and information about the software used for their research is compiled. This analysis
provides a comprehensive view of current trends and approaches in research related to
electrolysis and fuel cell technologies."
Out of the 60 articles analysed, as shown in Figure 1, over 50% focus on PEMFC, and
36% investigate PEM Water Electrolysis. This suggests several things:
 Popularity and Relevance: PEMFC and PEM Water Electrolysis are highly
popular and relevant research areas in the field of electrochemistry and
sustainable energy.
 Technological Advances: There may have been significant advances in PEMFC

and PEM Water Electrolysis technology in recent years. Researchers and
scientists are directing their efforts towards improving and optimizing these
systems.
 Industrial and Environmental Needs: Both industry and society are seeking
more efficient and sustainable solutions for energy generation and storage.
Fig. 1. Topics of the articles
Of all the articles analyzed, a comparative study was conducted on the CFD software
each one used for their studies. There is a total of 15 articles that could not be included in
this study. They were not included because some are paid or did not specify the software
they used. When we examine the results obtained in Figure 2, we see that ANSYS
software is highly utilized in this type of simulations, followed by COMSOL and
OpenFOAM. The "Other" category corresponds to software that is only used in 1 or 2
articles, such as xflow and CFD-ACE+. For more details on the analysis of the articles,
please refer to Annex 1 [¡Error! No se encuentra el origen de la referencia.].
Page 26 Report
Fig. 2. Software statistics
In conclusion, current studies focus on PEM fuel cells and PEM water electrolysers, and
the most commonly used software for this purpose is ANSYS. For this reason, the
software used in this work is ANSYS, and the simulations begin with PEMFC cases.
2.4. ANSYS Fluent’s Fuel Cell and electrolysis model
To simulate electrolysis cells, ANSYS Fluent software is used in version 2023 R1. In this
section we study the model that is implemented in this program for this type of electrolytic
cells as well as the cell geometry, the mesh used in different simulations and the contour
conditions applied [3][4]. This model can be used for PEMFC and PEM electrolysers.
2.4.1. Equations
This section focuses on describing the model used by ANSYS Fluent software to address
PEM (Proton Exchange Membrane) and electrolysis fuel cell models. ANSYS Fluent is a
computer simulation tool widely used in the field of engineering to study and analyse
various physical phenomena and systems.
In the context of PEM fuel cells and electrolysis, ANSYS Fluent offers a set of specific
features and capabilities to simulate and understand the behaviour of these systems. The
model used is based on solving fundamental equations that describe the physical and
chemical processes involved in the operation of PEM fuel cells and electrolysis.
2.4.2. Electrochemistry Modeling
The driving force behind the anode and cathode reactions is the surface overpotencial, in
other words, the difference between the phase potential of the solid and the phase
potential of the electrolyte/membrane. Therefore, two electric potential equations are
solved for in the Fuel Cell: one potential equation accounts for the electron transport
through the solid conductive materials (9) and the other potential equation (10) represents
the protonic transport of protons. The two potential equations are as follows
∇(𝜎𝑆𝑜𝑙 ∇𝜙𝑆𝑜𝑙 ) + 𝑅𝑆𝑜𝑙 = 0 (9)
∇(𝜎𝑀𝑒𝑚 ∇𝜙𝑀𝑒𝑚 ) + 𝑅𝑀𝑒𝑚 = 0 (10)
where:
1
𝜎 Electrical conductivity [Ω·𝑚]
𝜙 Electrical potential [𝑉]
𝐴
𝑅 Volumetric transfer current [𝑚3 ]
The following image, Fig. 3, illustrates the boundary conditions that are used for
solve the different PEM FC simulations.
Fig. 3. Boundary conditions

Page 28 Report
There are two types of external boundaries: those that have an electrical current
passing through them, and those that do not.
As no ionic current leaves the fuel cell through any external boundary, there is a zero
flux boundary condition for the membrane phase potential, 𝜙𝑚𝑒𝑚 , on all outside
boundaries.
For the solid phase potential, 𝜙𝑆𝑜𝑙 there are external boundaries on the anode and the
cathode side that are in contact with the external electric circuit. Electrical current
generated in the fuel cell only passes through these boundaries. On all other external
boundaries there is a zero flux boundary condition
for 𝜙𝑆𝑜𝑙 .
On the external contact boundaries, fixed values for 𝜙𝑆𝑜𝑙 are recommend. If the anode
side is set to zero, the (positive) value prescribed on the cathode side is the cell
voltage. Specifying a constant flux (say on the cathode side) means to specify
galvanostatic boundary conditions.
The transfer currents or the source terms in equations (9) and (10) are non-zero
only inside the catalyst layers and are computed as:
 For the solid phase, 𝑅𝑆𝑜𝑙 = −𝑅𝑎𝑛 (< 0) on the anode side and
𝑅𝑆𝑜𝑙 = +𝑅𝑐𝑎𝑡 (> 0) on the cathode side.
 For the membrane side, 𝑅𝑚𝑒𝑚 = +𝑅𝑎𝑛 (> 0) on the anode side and
𝑅𝑀𝑒𝑚 = −𝑅𝑐𝑎𝑡 (< 0) on the cathode side.
The source terms in (9) and (10) also called the exchange current density, have the
following general definitions:
𝛾𝑎𝑛
𝑟𝑒𝑓 [𝐴] 𝛼𝑎𝑛 𝐹𝜂𝑎𝑛 𝛼𝑐𝑎𝑡 𝐹𝜂𝑐𝑎𝑡
𝑅𝑎𝑛 = (𝜁𝑎𝑛 𝑗𝑎𝑛 ) ( ) (𝑒 𝑅𝑇 − 𝑒− 𝑅𝑇 ) (11)
[𝐴]𝑟𝑒𝑓
𝛾𝑐𝑎𝑡
𝑟𝑒𝑓 [𝐶] 𝛼𝑎𝑛 𝐹𝜂𝑎𝑛 𝛼𝑐𝑎𝑡 𝐹𝜂𝑐𝑎𝑡
𝑅𝑐𝑎𝑡 = (𝜁𝑐𝑎𝑡 𝑗𝑐𝑎𝑡 ) ( ) (𝑒 𝑅𝑇 + 𝑒− 𝑅𝑇 ) (12)
[𝐶]𝑟𝑒𝑓
Where:
𝐴
𝐽𝑟𝑒𝑓 Reference exchange current density per active surface area [𝑚2 ]
1
𝜁 Specific active surface area [𝑚]
𝐾𝑔·𝑚𝑜𝑙
[], []𝑟𝑒𝑓 Local species concentration [ ]
𝑚3
𝛾 concentration dependence
𝛼 Transfer coefficient
𝐶
𝐹 Faraday constant (9,65 · 107 𝐾𝑔·𝑚𝑜𝑙)
[A] concentration of 𝐻2 (PEMFC) or 𝐻2 𝑂 (Electrolysis)
[C] concentration of 𝑂2 (PEMFC) or 1 (Electrolysis)
𝜂 Activation loss
By default, the Butler-Volmer function is used in the ANSYS FLUENT Fuel Cell and
Electrolysis Model to compute the transfer currents inside the catalyst layers.
The driving force for the kinetics is the local surface over potential. It is generally the
difference between the solid and membrane potentials, 𝜙𝑆𝑜𝑙 and 𝜙𝑚𝑒𝑚
The gain in electrical potential from crossing from the anode to the cathode side can then
be taken into account by subtracting the open circuit voltage 𝑉𝑜𝑐 on the cathode side.
𝜂𝑎𝑛 = 𝜙𝑠𝑜𝑙 − 𝜙𝑚𝑒𝑚 (13)
𝜂𝑐𝑎𝑡 = 𝜙𝑠𝑜𝑙 − 𝜙𝑚𝑒𝑚 − 𝑉𝑜𝑐 (14)
2.4.3. Current and mass conservation
The following governing equations form the CFD model, using the Navier-Stokes
equations as the basis: continuity, momentum, mass transport (also known as species
conservation) and energy equations describe the transport of species in the model
(15)
Species volumetric source terms in the triple-phase boundaries due to electrochemical

reactions for the PEMFC, and Electrolysis, respectively, are:
For PEMFC:
𝑀𝑤,𝐻2
𝑆𝐻2 = − 𝑅 <0 (17)
2𝐹 𝑎𝑛
Page 30 Report
𝑀𝑤,𝑂2
𝑆𝑂2 = − 𝑅 <0 (18)
4𝐹 𝑐𝑎𝑡
𝑀𝑤,𝐻2 𝑂
𝑆𝐻2 𝑂 = − 𝑅𝑐𝑎𝑡 > 0 (19)
2𝐹
For electrolysis:
𝑀𝑤,𝐻2
𝑆𝐻2 = − 𝑅 >0 (20)
2𝐹 𝑎𝑛
𝑀𝑤,𝑂2
𝑆𝑂2 = − 𝑅 >0 (21)
4𝐹 𝑐𝑎𝑡
𝑀𝑤,𝐻2 𝑂
𝑆𝐻2 𝑂 = − 𝑅𝑐𝑎𝑡 < 0 (22)
2𝐹
The total electrical current produced in the cathode and the anode is the same,
therefore, we have the current conservation equation:
∫𝑎𝑛𝑜𝑑𝑒 𝑅𝑎𝑛 𝑑𝑉 = ∫𝑐𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑑𝑒 𝑅𝑐𝑎𝑡 𝑑𝑉 (23)
2.4.4. Heat Source
The energy equation is used to calculate temperatures:
(24)
Additional volumetric sources to the thermal energy equation are present because not
all chemical energy released in the electrochemical reactions can be converted to
electrical work due to irreversibilities of the processes. The total source that goes to the
thermal energy equation (that is, enthalpy) is:
𝑆ℎ = ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑐𝑡 − 𝑅𝑎𝑛,𝑐𝑎𝑡 𝜂𝑎𝑛,𝑐𝑎𝑡 + 𝐼 2 𝑅 + ℎ𝐿 (25)

2.4.5. Liquid Water Formation, Transport, and its Effects
Because PEM fuel cells function at relatively low temperatures (around 100 ºC), there's a
possibility of water vapour condensing into liquid water, particularly when operating at high
current densities. While having liquid water present helps keep the membrane hydrated, it
can also impede the passage of gas diffusion. This obstruction leads to a decrease in the
rate of diffusion, reduction in effective reactive surface area, and consequently, a decline
in cell performance.
To simulate the process of liquid water formation and movement, ANSYS Fluent employs
a saturation model. This model is based on a conservation equation that focuses on the
volume fraction of liquid water, denoted as s, which essentially represents the level of
water saturation
𝜕(𝜖𝜌𝑙 𝑠)
+ ∇(𝜌𝑙 ⃗⃗⃗
𝑉𝑙 𝑠) = 𝑟𝑤 (26)
𝜕𝑡
Where ε is the porosity, the subscript l stands for liquid water, and 𝑟𝑤 is the
condensation rate that is modelled as:
𝑃𝑤𝑣 − 𝑃𝑠𝑎𝑡
(1 − 𝑠)𝑐𝑟 𝑀𝐻2 𝑂 𝑖𝑓 (𝑃𝑤𝑣 > 𝑃𝑠𝑎𝑡 )
𝑟𝑤 = { 𝑅𝑇 (27)
𝑃𝑤𝑣 − 𝑃𝑠𝑎𝑡
𝑠 𝑐𝑟 𝑀𝐻2 𝑂 𝑖𝑓 (𝑃𝑤𝑣 < 𝑃𝑠𝑎𝑡 )
𝑅𝑇
where –rw is added to the water vapour equation, as well as the pressure correction
(mass source). This term is applied only inside the catalyst and gas diffusion layers. The
condensation rate constant is hardwired to 𝑐𝑟 = 100𝑠 −1 . It is assumed that the liquid
velocity, , is equivalent to the gas velocity inside the gas channel (that is, a fine mist).
Inside the highly-resistant porous zones, the use of the capillary diffusion term allows us
to replace the convective term in (26)(9)
𝜕(𝜀𝜌𝑙 𝑠) 𝐾𝑠 𝛾 𝑑𝑝𝑐
+ ∇ (𝜌𝑙 𝑠) = 𝑟𝑤 (28)
𝜕𝑡 𝜇𝑙 𝑑𝑠
Depending on the wetting phase, the capillary pressure is computed as a function of
(the Leverett function),
𝜎cos(𝜃𝐶 )
0.5
[1.417(1 − 𝑠) − 2.12(1 − 𝑠)2 + 1.263(1 − 𝑠)3 ] 𝜃𝐶 < 90º
𝐾
( )
𝑝𝑐 = 𝜀 (29)
𝜎cos(𝜃𝐶 )
[1.417(1 − 𝑠) − 2.12(1 − 𝑠)2 + 1.263(1 − 𝑠)3 ] 𝜃𝐶 > 90º
𝐾 0.5
{ (𝜀)
Page 32 Report
Where 𝜎 is the surface tension (N/m), 𝜃𝐶 is the contact angle and K the absolute
permeability.
The equation (26) models various physical processes such as condensation,

vaporization, capillary diffusion, and surface tension. The clogging of porous media and
flooding of the reactive surface are modeled by multiplying the porosity and active
surface area by (1-S), respectively
2.4.6. Properties
To calculate the diffusivity of the different fluids in the cell, the transport equation is used:
(30)
(31)
(32)
Gas Phase Species Diffusivity
Gas phase species diffusivities can be computed either by using the dilute approximation
method or by using the full multicomponent method. With the dilute approximation
method, we have
𝑝0 𝛾𝑝 𝑇 𝛾𝑡
𝐷𝑖 = 𝜀 1.5 (1
− 𝑠) 𝑟𝑠
𝐷𝑖0 ( ) ( ) (33)
𝑝 𝑇𝑂
Where 𝐷𝑖0 is the mass diffusivity of species at reference temperature and
pressure (𝑃0 , 𝑇0 ). These reference values and the exponents (𝛾𝑝 , 𝛾𝑡 ) as well as the
exponent of pore blockage (𝑟𝑠 ) are defined in the Fuel Cell and Electrolysis user
defined functions (UDF) as,
𝑝0 = 101325 𝑁/𝑚2
𝑇0 = 300 𝐾
𝛾𝑝 = 1.0 (34)
𝛾𝑡 = 1.5
𝑟𝑠 = 2.5
In addition to equation (33), the ANSYS Fluent model incorporates a method for
calculating species diffusion in the gaseous phase.
𝑖𝑗
𝐷𝑒𝑓𝑓 = (1 − 𝑠)𝑟𝑠 𝜀 1.5 𝐷𝑖𝑗 (35)
𝑖𝑗
Where 𝐷𝑒𝑓𝑓 represents the effective diffusivity of gas species, and 𝐷 𝑖𝑗 is the gas species
mass diffusivity computed by the full multicomponent diffusion method. Note that 𝜀 1.5 in
¡Error! No se encuentra el origen de la referencia. is used to simulate the impact of
tortuosity. This methodology is integrated as the default approach in the Fuel Cell and
Electrolysis Model.
Electrolyte Phase (Ionic) Conductivity
The electrolyte, also called the membrane, phase conductivity is modelled in PEMFC
as:
1 1
𝜎𝑚𝑒𝑚 = 𝛽(0.514𝜆 − 0.326)𝜔 𝑒 1268(303−𝑇) (36)
Where 𝜆 is the water content. Two model constants, 𝛽 and 𝜔 are introduced in ANSYS
Fluent for generality. The equation (36) becomes the original correlation when 𝛽 =
𝜔 = 1.
Osmotic Drag Coefficient
𝜆
𝑛𝑑 = 2.5 (37)
22
Back Diffusion Flux
𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓 𝜌𝑚
𝐽𝑤 =− 𝑀 𝐷 ∇𝜆 (38)
𝑀𝑚 𝐻2 𝑂 𝑙
Where 𝜌𝑚 and 𝑀𝑚 are the density and the equivalent weight of the dry membrane,
respectively.
Membrane Water Diffusivity
1 1
𝐷𝑙 = 𝑓(𝜆)𝑒 2416(303−𝑇) (39)
Page 34 Report
Water Content
𝜆 = 0.043 + 17.18𝑎 − 39.85𝑎2 + 36𝑎3 (𝑎 < 1)

(40)
𝜆 = 14 + 1.4(𝑎 − 1) (𝑎 > 1)
In (40) a is the water activity that is defined as,
𝑃𝑤𝑣
𝑎= + 2𝑠 (41)
𝑃𝑠𝑎𝑡
Where 𝑃𝑤𝑣 is the water vapour pressure that is calculated based upon the molar
fraction of the vapour (42) and the local pressure 𝑃𝑠𝑎𝑡 is the saturation pressure
that is calculated in terms of atm in (43).
𝑃𝑤𝑣 = 𝑥𝐻2 𝑂 𝑃 (42)
log 𝑃𝑠𝑎𝑡 = −2.1794 + 0.02953(𝑇 − 273.17) − 9.1837 · 10−5 (𝑇 − 273.17)2

+ 1.4454 · 10−7 (𝑇 − 273.17)3 (43)
Leakage Current (Cross-Over Current)
The leakage current, 𝐼𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑘 (A), models the overall effect of species crossover from one
electrode to another through the electrolyte. In addition to the source terms, the following
additional volumetric source terms are included in the respective equations
𝑀𝑤,𝐻2 𝐼𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑘
𝑆𝐻2 = − (44)
2𝐹 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑜𝑑𝑒
𝑀𝑤,𝑂2 𝐼𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑘
𝑆𝑂2 = − (45)
4𝐹 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑐𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑑𝑒
𝑀𝑤,𝐻2 𝑂 𝐼𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑘
𝑆𝐻2 𝑂 = − (46)
2𝐹 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑐𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑑𝑒
Here, 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑜𝑑𝑒 and 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑐𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑑𝑒 are the he volumes of the catalytic layers on the anode
and cathode sides, and 2 and 4 are the numbers of electrons per mole of reactants and
products
2.5. CFD simulation process in Proton Exchange Membrane

(PEM) fuel cells
2.5.1. Geometry and mesh
To begin, it's important to understand that when utilizing the Fuel Cell and Electrolysis
model within the ANSYS software, a total of 7 components need to be defined (Anode
flow channel, Anode gas diffusion layer, Anode catalyst layer, Membrane layer, Cathode
catalyst layer, Cathode gas diffusion layer, Cathode flow channel) and 3 additional
components need to be defined if they are present in your cell (Anode current collector,
Cathode current collector, and Coolant channel). The cell being studied, as shown in Fig.
4, includes the essential components and the current collectors.
Fig. 4. Frontal view of the study cell
A Anode Current Collector
B Anode Flow Channel
C Cathode Flow Channel

Page 36 Report
D Cathode Current Collector
E Anode Gas Diffusion Layer
F Anode Catalyst Layer
G Membrane or Electrolyte
H Cathode Catalyst Layer
I Cathode Gas Diffusion Layer

Table 2.Parts of the fuel cell in Fig. 4
The geometries used in this study were designed and created using SolidWorks. Initially,
all the necessary parts to form the final solid were constructed, ensuring that these parts
had the correct dimensions. Once all the parts were created, assembly was performed to
obtain the complete representation of the fuel cell. After the complete geometry was
created in SolidWorks, it was imported into the ANSYS Workbench environment using
the .IGS format. This step ensured an effective and accurate transfer of the geometry to
the ANSYS simulation platform.
Subsequently, once the solid was imported into ANSYS, mesh generation was carried
out. It is important to note that each simulation conducted in this study may involve one or
multiple meshes, which will be described in detail in the practical part of the work.
However, all meshes shared two key configurations: the physics preference was always
set to CFD, and the solver preference was adjusted to Fluent
2.5.2. Simulation: model and boundary conditions
ANSYS Fuel Cell and Electrolysis model offers a selection of three cell types: PEMFC,
SOFC, and Electrolysis. For our simulations, we will opt for PEMFC. Additionally, ANSYS
provides a range of configurable options that can be enabled or disabled. These options
include Joule Heating, Reaction Heating, Electrochemistry Sources, Butler-Volmer Rate,
Membrane Water Transport, Multiphase, Multicomponent Diffusion, and Anisotropic E-
Conductivity in Porous Electrode. Furthermore, the water content 𝜆 (40) and the
saturation term 𝑟𝑤 (27) can also be customized according to specific preferences. By
default, these values are 𝜆 = 0.04 and 𝑟𝑤 = 0.05.
As you work, you can make use of the different tabs available to you, allowing you to
adjust the properties for each of the components that have been defined in the geometry.
This level of control enables you to make intricate changes according to your needs. For
instance, you can modify parameters like the porosities of the individual layers within the
Membrane Electrode Assembly (MEA) or even specify the types of materials used for
each specific region.
Boundary conditions are crucial elements in CFD simulation and play an essential role in
representing flow interactions within a PEMFC (Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell). In
this study, boundary conditions have been defined and configured using Fluent software.
Two main types of boundary conditions have been primarily utilized for the conducted
simulations:
 Inlet and Outlet Conditions: These conditions are employed to represent the
inflows and outflows of fluids within the fuel cell. They are configured to establish
properties and behaviours of gases entering and exiting the cell, such as velocity
and species composition.
 Wall Conditions: These conditions are applied to various surfaces within the fuel
cell to modify specific parameters. Wall conditions allow for adjustments to
properties like thermal conductivity, surface roughness, and heat transfer at solid-
fluid interfaces.
It is important to emphasize that the selection and configuration of boundary conditions

are tailored to each specific simulation. Specific details of the boundary conditions will be
addressed in greater depth in the practical part, where they will be described in detail for
each simulation case.
2.5.3. Results analysis
Once the simulation has been completed to obtain the results, the "Results" section in
ANSYS Workbench is utilized. Within this section, various important actions can be
performed, including:
 Result Visualization: This allows for the visual examination of simulation

outcomes through graphical representations, such as temperature plots, velocity
distributions, and electromagnetic field patterns. This visualization helps in
comprehending how the model behaves under different conditions.
 Charts and Diagrams: ANSYS Workbench provides tools to create customized
charts and diagrams. These tools are useful for presenting simulation results in a
clear and effective manner, aiding in the interpretation of data.
 Data Extraction: ANSYS Workbench enables the extraction of specific numerical
data from the simulation results. This extracted data can be further analysed or
used in reports and presentations.
This section is essential for making informed design decisions based on the simulation
outcomes
Page 38 Report
Fig. 5. Steps to follow to simulate
Fig. 5. Illustrates the steps involved in conducting a CFD simulation. These steps include:
1. Geometry: import the relevant geometry which has been previously created in
SolidWorks.
2. Mesh: Edit and generate the mesh, ensuring that it is suitable for the simulation.
3. Setup and Solution: Define and set up the problem to be simulated, including
specifying boundary conditions and other relevant parameters.
4. Results: Perform the simulation and analyse the solution section.

3. Simulations of PEMFC in Ansys-Fluent
3.1. Methodology
Before beginning the simulation, thorough research was conducted, which encompassed
two crucial aspects: the underlying theoretical model in PEMFC (Proton Exchange
Membrane Fuel Cell) and familiarity with the ANSYS Fluent software, a powerful CFD
(Computational Fluid Dynamics) simulation tool. A deep understanding of the PEMFC
model is essential, as it allows for the accurate representation of the physical and
chemical phenomena occurring within the fuel cell.
In the theoretical part of the research, the fundamental principles of PEMFC operation
were extensively examined. These principles involve proton transfer processes, mass
transport of reactants and products, and electrochemical reactions. This theoretical
understanding is crucial for the proper selection of mathematical models and physical
parameters in the Fluent software, ensuring that the simulations accurately and reliably
reflect the behaviour of a real PEMFC.
The next phase involved gaining practical experience with Fluent software. ANSYS Fluent
is a versatile and widely used tool in the CFD simulation research community. Multiple
modules and options available in the software were explored and adapted to the specific
needs of this study. This included defining geometry, creating meshes, selecting species
transport models, adjusting boundary conditions, and configuring electrochemical
reactions within the fuel cell.
In addition to theoretical research and understanding of ANSYS Fluent software, online

resources were leveraged to further enrich the knowledge base. Two YouTube videos
were used as a starting point, with one directly provided by ANSYS [5] [6]. These videos
provided valuable insights into the capabilities and specific functions of the software in the
context of CFD simulation of PEMFCs. The official ANSYS video allowed for a detailed
exploration of features and tools provided by the software developer, while the second
video offered a practical perspective on addressing common challenges in PEMFC CFD
simulation, based on previous user experiences. These resources effectively
complemented prior research and helped refine the methodology used in this study,
enabling a faster and more effective familiarization with ANSYS Fluent's specific
capabilities.
Throughout the development of CFD simulations in this project, a flexible and adaptable
approach was adopted. Each simulation was considered a learning opportunity, and
problems and challenges were addressed as they arose. This involved a series of
iterations and adjustments in the simulation process, including reconsideration of previous
Page 40 Report
steps in the methodology to find effective solutions. At various points in the study,
challenges related to simulation convergence, geometry, meshing, and the definition of
specific boundary conditions were encountered, and simulation settings were adjusted
accordingly.
3.2. Learning concepts. First simulation
3.2.1. Geometry
For the initial approach to the ANSYS software, a representative geometry of a Proton
Exchange Membrane (PEM) fuel cell was used, as shown in, Fig. 6. Geometry of the first
cellThis cell was designed to incorporate the essential parts present in any PEM cell, and
symmetry in its arrangement was sought. Furthermore, all components of the Membrane
Electrode Assembly (MEA), including the catalyst, the electrolyte, and the gas diffusion
layer, had the same thickness. The selection of these dimensions, detailed in Table 3,
was based on the geometry presented in the previously mentioned videos [5] [6]and on
ease of assembly in SolidWorks. This allowed for keeping the fuel cell design relatively
simple, with a total of only three distinct parts, Table 3. Dimensions of the first cell
Fig. 6. Geometry of the first cell

Part of the cell Length x Width x Height [mm]
Current collector 100 x 50 x 40
Flow channel 100 x 15 x 2,5
Gas diffusion layer, catalyst and electrolyte 100 x 50 x 12,5

Table 3. Dimensions of the first cell
3.2.2. Mesh
For the first simulation in this study, Fig. 7, a simple mesh structure has been chosen.
This choice was based on three key factors:
Model concepts: The primary goal of this initial simulation is to become familiar with the
model. Using a simpler mesh allows for a focus on understanding the essential aspects of
the simulation process.
Global Decision: By maintaining a simple mesh, it becomes easier to obtain results that
provide global insights into the system's behaviour. This enables making initial decisions
regarding the research direction and the selection of more detailed approaches in
subsequent simulations.
Student Version Limitations: It's important to note that in the student version of ANSYS,
there is a limitation on the number of nodes that can be used in the mesh. To optimize the
available resources and avoid excessively long simulation times, a simpler mesh has
been preferred for this initial phase of the study.
In later simulations, more detailed and complex meshes will be considered as specific
aspects of each case are explored in-depth. This strategy allows for a gradual progression
in the complexity of the simulations, which is beneficial in achieving the research
objectives.
Page 42 Report
Fig. 7. Mesh num.1
3.2.3. Set up
In this section, define the parameters of the fuel cell to be simulated employing the
PEMFC and electrolyser model. These parameters play a fundamental role in delineating
the initial conditions and pertinent values requisite for the simulation.
3.2.3.1. Model options
Fig. 8. Model options in the fuel cell and electrolysis model
Several fuel cell model options are available in the model but the ones used are
marked in the Fig. 8:
 Joule heating: this option includes the term 𝐼 2 𝑅 in the energy source term in (22).
 Reaction heating: this option takes into account the heat generated by the
electrochemical reactions and the product of transfer current and the over-
potentials in the energy source term (47) from in the calculations.
 The Electrochemistry Sources option allows the Fuel Cell and Electrolysis
Model to take electrochemistry effects into account
 The Butler-Volmer Rate option (the default) is used to compute the transfer
currents inside the catalyst layers.
 The Membrane Water Transport option takes into account the transport of water
across the membrane
3.2.3.2. Model parameters
Table 4 specifies the electrochemical parameters. for the Fuel Cell and Electrolysis
𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑟𝑒𝑓
Model. 𝑗𝑎𝑛 and 𝑗𝑐𝑎𝑡 are the reference current density, [𝐻2 ]𝑟𝑒𝑓 and
[𝑂2 ]𝑟𝑒𝑓 corresponds to the reference concentration of Hydrogen and Oxygen respectively,
the terms 𝛾 are the concentration exponents and 𝛼 corresponds to the transfer
coefficients and Voc is the open circuit voltage. All the parameters have the default value.
𝒓𝒆𝒇
𝒋𝒂𝒏 1000 [𝐴/𝑚2 ]
𝒓𝒆𝒇
𝒋𝒄𝒂𝒕 20 [𝐴/𝑚2 ]
𝜶𝒂𝒏 2
𝜶𝒄𝒂𝒕 2
𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙
[𝑯𝟐 ]𝒓𝒆𝒇 1[ ]
𝑚3
𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙
[𝑶𝟐 ]𝒓𝒆𝒇 1[ ]
𝑚3
𝜸𝒂𝒏 0.5
𝜸𝒄𝒂𝒕 1
𝑽𝒐𝒄 1.1V
Table 4.Electrochemistry parameters

Page 44 Report
3.2.3.3. Current collectors
The material for both the anode and cathode current collectors is referred to as "current-
default." It is intrinsic to the model. The properties are displayed in the Table 5.
𝒌𝒈 2719
Density [𝒎𝟑]
𝑱 871
Cp [𝒌𝒈𝑲]
𝑾 100
Thermal Conductivity [𝒎 𝑲]
Electrical Conductivity [𝒎]

𝑺 106
Table 5. Collector-default properties
3.2.3.4. Gas Diffusion Layers
The material for both the anode and cathode gas diffusion layers is referred to as "difflayer-
𝒌𝒈 2719
Density [ ]
𝒎𝟑
𝑱 871
Cp [𝒌𝒈𝑲]
𝑾 10
𝑺 5000
Porosity 0.5
Viscous Resistance (𝒎𝟐)

𝟏 1012
Table 6. Difflayer-default properties

3.2.3.5. Catalyst Layers
The material for both the anode and cathode catalyst layers is referred to as "catalyst-
𝒌𝒈 2719
Density [𝒎𝟑]
𝑱 871
Cp [𝒌𝒈𝑲]
𝑾 10
𝑺 5000
Porosity 0.3
𝟏 2 · 10^5
Viscous Resistance ( )
𝒎𝟐
Table 7. Catalyst-default properties
3.2.3.6. Electrolyte
The material for the electrolyte is referred to as "electrolyte-default." It is intrinsic to the

model. The properties are displayed in the Table 8.
𝒌𝒈 1980
Density [𝒎𝟑]
𝑱 2000
Cp [ ]
𝒌𝒈𝑲
𝑾 2

𝑺 10−16
Table 8. Electrolyte-default properties
3.2.4. Boundary conditions
3.2.4.1. Flow
In this simulation, two flows have been defined. The anode flow, corresponding to
hydrogen, enters from the front and exits from the rear, while the cathode flow,
corresponding to oxygen, enters from the rear and exits from the front. To enhance
Page 46 Report
understanding of the flow directions, an image is included (Fig. 9) in which red arrows
represent the inputs and blue arrows represent the outputs. Additionally, the cell channels
are more visible, as the current collectors have been hidden. Finally, Table 9 provide
detailed information about the parameters of the inlets and outlets starts with a constant
temperature of 353.15K.
Fig. 9. Flow channel schematic
Anode Inlet Cathode Inlet
𝒌𝒈
Mass flow rate [ 𝒔 ] 3 · 10−7 2 · 10−6
Temperature [K] 353.15 353.15
𝑯𝟐 mass fraction 0.6 0
𝑶𝟐 mass fraction 0 0.21
𝑯𝟐 𝑶 mass fraction 0.4 0.15
Table 9. Mass flow inlets
3.2.4.2. Walls
In the context of PEMFC simulations, specific boundary conditions have been established
on the outer surfaces of the cell to ensure its proper operation. Two of the critical surfaces
in this study are the upper wall of the anode and the lower wall of the cathode. In the
anode, a potential condition has been applied to ensure that the potential is lower than
that of the cathode. Similarly, on the lower wall of the cathode, a potential condition has
been implemented to ensure that the potential is higher than that of the anode, thus
facilitating oxygen reduction and the flow of electrons in the appropriate direction. These
potential conditions, Table 10, play a fundamental role in the proper functioning of the
PEMFC by maintaining the necessary potential balance for electrochemical reactions to
occur efficiently. Finally, perfect insulation boundary conditions have been applied to all
other exterior surfaces of the cell.
Upper Surface (Anode) Lower Surface (Cathode)
Temperature [K] 353.15 353.15
Electric Potencial [V] 0 0.6

Table 10. Walls boundary conditions
3.2.5. Solution
To initiate the simulation, the "hybrid simulation" option has been employed. This
initialization method offers an intelligent approach to simulation initialization. This method
automatically adjusts initialization parameters based on the specific characteristics of
each case. These adjustments can range from initial conditions, convergence criteria, and
other relevant parameters. The primary purpose of this approach is to enhance simulation
efficiency and convergence, resulting in a more effective process.
In addition to this automatic adjustment, the method allows the possibility of using results
obtained from previous simulations, as long as they are relevant to the current case. This
option can have a significant impact on the initialization speed, as it starts from an initial
solution that is close to the desired final solution. Overall, these features make the hybrid
initialization method a valuable tool for optimizing and speeding up the simulation
process.
Once the geometry, mesh, and boundary conditions were defined, the simulation was
initiated using the previously described method, with a total of 10 planned iterations. At
that point, the simulation would progress, reaching a maximum of 2, 3, or 4 iterations of
the initialization before automatically closing. Subsequently, an analysis was conducted to
identify potential issues that could be causing the simulation to terminate prematurely.
The factor considered most likely to be causing the problem was mesh quality, which was
perceived as insufficient. Consequently, the decision was made to refine the areas
deemed more complex, specifically those comprising the MEA: the electrolyte, gas
diffusion, and the catalyst. The mesh was refined, as can be observed in Fig. 10 and Fig.
11.
Page 48 Report
Fig. 10. Front view of the MEA’s refinement. In order from top to bottom: anode gdl, anode catalyst,
membrane, cathode catalyst, cathode gdl
Fig. 11.Side view of the MEA's refinement. In order from top to bottom: anode gdl, anode catalyst, membrane,
cathode catalyst, cathode gdl
With the mesh improvement, the simulation reached the same point as with the old mesh.
Therefore, improvements need to be made in several areas. The first involves a more
precise mesh definition, especially in the MEA and the channels. The second
consideration is that the thickness may be too high compared to a real cell, which could
hinder the initialization of the reaction. Finally, a review of the boundary conditions is
required, particularly those related to flow and potential at the surface.
3.2.6. Conclusions
In Table 11, the obstacles encountered in this simulation and the paths forward for future
simulations are presented.
Obstacle Improvements to do
No initialization of the model Mesh upgrade
Review of boundary conditions
Modify geometry
Table 11.Summary of the simulation 1
3.3. The search of convergence. Second simulation
The primary goal of this second simulation is to achieve convergence, an achievement

that had previously eluded us. To accomplish this, improved strategies are being
implemented, which include modifying the geometry and refining the mesh, along with a
more detailed analysis of the flow boundary conditions.
3.3.1. Geometry
In the second simulation, a decision has been made to maintain a geometry very similar
to the previous one. The geometry remains symmetric on both sides of the PEMFC cell,
contributing to simulation efficiency. However, one of the key modifications made in this
second simulation is related to the components comprising the MEA. Specifically, the
height of the MEA components has been significantly reduced compared to the initial
geometry. This height reduction has been implemented with the purpose of simplifying the
initialization of the chemical reaction in the PEMFC cell. The parts have also been
elongated for the same reason. For further details, you can refer to Table 12.
To create this geometry in SolidWorks, a total of 5 parts are required because the
electrolyte, catalyst layer, and gas diffusion layer doesn’t have the same dimensions as in
the previous case.
Part of the cell Length x Width x Height [mm]
Current collector 250 x 6 x 5
Flow channel 250 x 2 x 2
Gas diffusion layer 250 x 6 x 0,3
Catalyst Layer 250 x 6 x 0,15
Electrolyte 250 x 6 x 0,02

Table 12. Geometry of the second cell
3.3.2. Mesh
The current simulation has involved an extensive mesh refinement process for all
components of the cell. Initially, the focus was on refining the Membrane Electrode
Assembly (MEA). Subsequently, a remeshing process was applied to the channels,
Page 50 Report
introducing new conditions to improve the mesh quality in those specific areas. However,
less attention has been given to refining the collectors compared to other components.
This refinement process has been guided by three fundamental factors. First, there is a
limit imposed by the maximum number of nodes allowed in the license of Ansys Fluent.
Additionally, two new mesh quality criteria have been introduced: mesh skewness and
mesh orthogonality. Both criteria are values within a range of 0 to 1, and in this case
study, the goal is to have these values at least in the "very good" range, view Fig. 12.
These mesh improvements have been implemented with the aim of achieving
convergence in the simulation and, at the same time, ruling out possible model errors that
could affect the accuracy of the results.
Fig. 12. New mesh quality criteria
3.3.2.1. MEA refinement
The goal of the MEA refinement has been on increasing the number of nodes in the
element mesh, especially in the vertical direction, aiming to generate a steeper gradient
between nearby points. This facilitates the convergence of the simulations.
Three nodes in the vertical direction are desired, with an increase in the horizontal
direction as much as possible. To achieve this, the desired number of divisions is defined
along the vertical edges. Another method that can be used is to define the node size as
the height divided by the desired number of nodes. However, this approach creates many
very small nodes, resulting in an exponential increase in the total number of cell nodes
and quickly reaching the imposed node limit.
The mesh with numerical conditions is shown in Fig. 13.The longer parts correspond to
the gas diffusion layer, the central one to the electrolyte, and the two thinner ones
between the other two are the catalyser. When using the edge splitting method, there is a
higher node density around these areas.
Fig. 13. MEA refinement for second simulation
3.3.2.2. Channel refinement
To refine the channels, the inflation option has been used. With this method, you select
the inlets and outlets of the channels and the solids in contact with the fluid. The mesh
created has a higher number of nodes around the contact zone to better capture fluid
phenomena. In the image, the anode inlet is displayed. It's worth noting that both the
anode outlet and the inlet and outlet for the cathode fluid are very similar.
Fig. 14. Anode inlet mesh

Page 52 Report
3.3.2.3. Global vision of the mesh
To finalize the mesh, the current collector part was refined slightly. In Fig. 15, you can see
the mesh used in this second simulation. On the left side, the isometric view is shown,
and on the right, the front view of the mesh. Additionally, Table 13 analyses the skewness
and orthogonal quality values.
Fig. 15. Global vision of the second mesh
Average Range (based on Fig. 12)
Skewness 0,12279 Excellent
Orthogonal Quality 0,87898 Very Good

Table 13. Quality of the second mesh. Nodes: 424,670
3.3.3. Boundary Conditions
The boundary conditions imposed in this simulation are very similar to those in the
previous simulation [3.2.4]. Regarding temperatures, they are exactly the same, and the
mass flow rates have the same value as described earlier. Finally, the electric potentials
of the cell have not been modified.
The only measures taken in the boundary conditions were two: reversing the flow
direction at the cathode, so that both flows enter from the front of the cell and exit from the
back as shown in Fig. 16 and calculating the Reynolds number to ensure that the flow at
the anode and cathode is laminar. To do this, the hydraulic diameter and cross-sectional
area were calculated with the channel dimensions and viscosity were calculated using
thermodynamic tables, taking into account the operating pressure (1 atm) and
temperature (353.15 K). When analysing the results obtained in Table 14, it is affirmed
that the flows are laminar because the calculated Reynolds numbers are small.
Fig. 16. Modified mass flow direction
Hydraulic Dinamic
Mass flow Section
diameter viscosity Reynolds
rate (Kg/s) (𝒎𝟐 )
(m) (Pa*s)
Anode flux 3 · 10−7 0,002 1,3 · 10−5 4 · 10−6 11,5
Cathode 2 · 10−6 0,002 2,12 · 10−5 4 · 10−6 47,1
Table 14. Reynolds calculation
3.3.4. Set Up and solutions
The second simulation carried out was initialized using the hybrid initialization method
provided by Ansys, with a total of 100 iterations performed to reach a steady state. The
time step in Ansys is calculated automatically.
With this simulation, convergence to the solution is achieved but the obtained results were
not satisfactory. Significantly higher magnitude values were observed throughout the cell
compared to typical values. Regarding temperature, values close to absolute zero were
recorded, while the majority of the cell was around 3500 K. As for current density, an
abnormally high average value on the order of 1017 𝐴/𝑚𝑚2 was identified. An analysis of
species concentrations revealed that the expected reaction was also not taking place.
Various strategies have been investigated to address this issue. Modifications have been
made to the boundary conditions, including adjustments to the cell potentials, variations in
flow concentrations, and changes in temperatures. However, none of these modifications
have yielded satisfactory results, and the system continues to reach the same point of
instability.
Page 54 Report
3.3.5. Conclusions
On the one hand, the results obtained in this simulation, two crucial problems requiring
correction emerge: the high temperature gradient and the elevated current density. These
two parameters stand out as they constitute the central focus of study in this Final Degree
Project.
On the other hand, the ability to initialize the simulation indicates significant progress
compared to the previous starting point. This achievement can be attributed to the
adjustments and refinements made in the meshing.
At this stage of the research, there is no defined strategy to achieve the set objectives.
For this reason, the formulation of a more simplified problem focused solely on
temperatures is being considered. This new perspective aims to broaden our horizons in
terms of potential solutions.
Obstacle To do
Huge temperature Simplified problem
Huge current density

Table 15. Summary of the simulation 2
3.4. Third Iteration: Simplified Simulation
With the results obtained in the previous simulation [3.3], two variables exhibit significant
anomalies: current density and temperature, both showing excessively high values. At this
point in the research, the next steps for the simulations were not clear. For this reason,
the decision has been made to simplify the approach, even though it implies a step back
from the initially set objectives. The aim is to gain a broader perspective before
proceeding with the study of the PEMFC. This simpler attempt primarily aims to gather
ideas to address the challenge posed by the temperature, which are several orders of
magnitude higher than typical values in PEMFC cells.
The problem to be simulated is as follows: the geometry is identical to that used in the
second simulation; perfect insulation will be maintained on all external surfaces of the cell,
except for two specific areas - the top of the anode and the bottom of the cathode.
Additionally, a modification has been made in the flow and cell materials. However it is
important to note that the mesh used is exactly the same as in the previous simulation.
3.4.1. Modifications
On one hand, the boundary conditions have been modified as detailed in Fig. 17.The
upper surface of the anode is in contact with the surroundings, which are at a temperature
of 22ºC and have a convection coefficient of 5 (W/m²K). The cathode surface receives a
heat flux of 30 W/m². The flows have also been modified: air enters the anode at 40ºC
and 20 m/s, while at the cathode it enters at 10ºC and 10 m/s.
Fig. 17. New boundary conditions
On the other hand, modifications have been made to all the materials of the cell
components. In this new simulation, it is required that all parts be made of copper. The
properties of this material are obtained directly from the Ansys Fluent library, as detailed
in Table 16.
.
𝒌𝒈 8978
Density [ ]
𝒎𝟑
𝑱 381
Cp [𝒌𝒈𝑲]
𝑾 287,6
Table 16. Copper properties

Page 56 Report
3.4.2. Simulation and results
With this simulation, the first goal is to achieve the correct application of boundary
conditions. This is essential to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the simulation results.
Secondly, it is of utmost importance to investigate and understand the reason behind the
exceptionally high results in the previous simulation.
In this simplified simulation, only two physical models are employed: the energy equation
and a laminar model for air flows. Boundary conditions describing the posed problem
have been established, and the simulation has been initialized using the "hybrid
simulation" method provided by ANSYS, as explained in the first simulation.
Subsequently, the simulation was carried out until reaching a steady state, using an
automatic time-stepping method with a total of 200 iterations. The total duration of the
simulation was approximately 20 minutes.
Fig. 18. Temperature distribution in the middle of the cell
Once the simulation was completed, a plane was generated that passes through the cell's
middle, allowing for the observation of temperatures in the middle of the channels. The
steady-state temperature map is presented in Fig. 18, where extremely high values,
around 5000 K, are observed, as well as temperatures close to absolute zero.
However, it is crucial to highlight a particular region: the electrolyte, where points with very
high and very low temperatures in immediate proximity are identified, with nodes even
being located side by side. Between these extreme and close points, a significant gradient
is not recorded, which characterizes them as singular points. To correct this situation,
corrective measures need to be implemented. In many cases, these singular points are
associated with poor mesh quality, implying that future improvements should focus on this
area.
To address this issue, a detailed study of the mesh used in the current electrolyte
simulation has been conducted, which is shown in greater detail in Fig. 19. The method
used to create the three nodes in the vertical direction of the electrolyte involved
subdividing the four edges of the piece into three equal parts, resulting in an increase in
node size as we move away from them. When observing the area with the highest
concentration of singular points, it is confirmed that it is located in the middle of the
electrolyte, right where the node size is bigger.
Fig. 19. Electrolyte mesh used
3.4.3. Conclusions
This latter analysis leads us to the conclusion that the error may be associated with the
mesh. Therefore, it is necessary to readjust the way it is generated and ensure that it is
much more uniform throughout the entire electrolyte.
Obstacle Improvements to do
Irregular values detected in the Uniform the mesh in the membrane

electrolyte
Table 17. Summary of the simulation 3
Page 58 Report
3.5. Refined mesh: Fourth simulation
This simulation aims to achieve the goals set in the previous one with a simpler model,
but this time with a much more refined mesh for the electrolyte. The setup and boundary
conditions don’t have been modified compared to the previous simulation.
3.5.1. Mesh
In this third simulation, the mesh of the electrolyte has been improved. To achieve this,
the way nodes are generated has been changed. This time, a nodal size of 6 · 10−5 mm
has been defined, making the mesh completely uniform, as shown in Fig. 20. However, it
is much denser, which requires modifications to other parts to avoid exceeding the limit of
512,000 nodes. The mesh contains a higher node density in the areas close to the MEA
and larger nodes in the current collectors.
Fig. 20. Corner of the membrane in isometric view

Fig. 21. Third mesh
Before starting the simulation, it has been verified, once again, that the values of
orthogonal quality and skewness are within the correct range, as shown in Table 18.
Average Range (based on Fig. 12)
Skewness 0,11824 Excellent
Orthogonal Quality 0,88195 Very Good

Table 18. Quality of the third mesh
3.5.2. Simulation and results
The simulation method has not been altered. It continues to be initialized with the hybrid
method, and the simulation has been launched with automatic step time and a total of 200
iterations.
The results obtained in this simulation have been satisfactory. As shown in image 12, the
points with extreme temperatures from the previous simulation have disappeared, along
with the anomalous temperatures. The temperature distribution is uniform throughout the
copper cell, and it can be observed how the air, entering from the left, gradually cools
along the cell. The results are accurate, as the two heat flows are minimal and have
Page 60 Report
negligible impact on the copper's temperature. Consequently, the copper remains colder
than the incoming flows. As the air traverse through the channel, their temperature drops
significantly.
Fig. 22. Temperature at the middle of the geometry
In addition, the velocity profiles of the fluids have also been studied to understand the
underlying physical phenomenon, as shown in Fig. 23. The velocity profiles have been
studied at the cell outlet, where the flow has fully developed. It can be seen that both flows
exhibit a distribution characteristic of laminar flows, with a parabolic shape, with maximum
velocity in the middle of the channel and zero at the walls. This is further confirmed by
calculating the Reynolds numbers, as shown in Table 19.
Fig. 23.Velocity profiles

Hydraulic Cinematic
Velocity (m/s) 𝒎𝟐 Reynolds
diameter (m) viscosity ( )
𝒔
Anode flux 10 0,002 1,43 · 10−5 701
Cathode 5 0,002 1,70 · 10−5 1180

Table 19. Reynolds calculus
3.5.3. Mesh verification
To verify that the mesh has been corrected properly and that the results analyzed in the
previous section are not a result of chance, three new simulations will be conducted with
different boundary conditions in the flows. These iterations serve the sole purpose of
confirming that singular points do not occur again in the cell membrane or at any other
point within it.
The boundary conditions applied in the different iterations are summarized in Table 20,
Table 21 and Table 22, while the obtained results are presented in Fig. 24, Fig. 25 and
Fig. 26.
 Iteration I
FLUENT TEMPERATURE VELOCITY
AIR 20ºC 5 m/s

ANODO
AIR 10ºC 10 m/s

CATODO
Table 20. Description of the flows for iteration 1
Page 62 Report
Fig. 24. Temperatures of the iteration 1
 Iteration II
AIR 40ºC 10 m/s

ANODO
AIR 40ºC 10 m/s

CATODO

 Iteration III
WATER 90ºC 5 m/s

ANODO
AIR 10ºC 10 m/s

CATODO
3.5.4. Conclusions
By conducting various simulations and thoroughly analysing the obtained results, a crucial
conclusion is reached: by homogenizing the node size of the PEM, specifically concerning
the membrane itself, it is possible to eliminate the critical points that arose in the third
simulation [5.4]. As a result of this homogenization, all studied parameters fall within the
expected values. This advancement signifies a significant achievement, as it is anticipated
that this refinement will stabilize the temperatures and have a positive impact on current
density in the upcoming fuel cell analysis.
3.6. Succesful Simulation: The last iteration.
In this section, the process that concluded the simulation period is detailed meticulously.
With this milestone, the phase of analysis and experimentation, which encompassed
various models and cases, comes to a close. From now on, the stage dedicated to the
understanding and definitive conclusion of the findings begins.
Page 64 Report
Throughout this section, the different elements that were previously defined before
embarking on the simulations will be revisited and examined. Additionally, a detailed
analysis of the collected data related to the Fuel Cell issue will be conducted. This
process of review and analysis is carried out to consolidate a more complete and accurate
understanding of the results obtained thus far and to establish the groundwork for the
upcoming phases of the research.
3.6.1. Geometry
The geometry used is based on the implementation from the second simulation. In the
second version of the geometry, substantial changes were made to the cell dimensions,
aiming for a representation much closer to a realistic configuration. These changes,
guided by the goal of faithfully replicating the dimensions of an operational fuel cell, can
be referred to in section [3.3.1].
3.6.2. Mesh
The mesh implemented in the fourth simulation proved to be effective in resolving the
issue of singular points in the cell membrane, [¡Error! No se encuentra el origen de la
referencia.]. For this reason, this mesh has been selected for the simulation of the
PEMFC cell. By using this configuration, it is expected that the anomalous values
recorded in the second simulation regarding temperature and current density will
decrease or even disappear entirely. The mesh stood out for the uniformity of node sizes
in the components comprising the MEA: the gas diffusion layer, the catalysts and the
membrane.
This choice is based on the demonstrated ability of this mesh to provide more stable and
realistic results. Confidence in its effectiveness is rooted in the significant improvement it
has shown compared to previous iterations. With this decision, a substantial advancement
towards obtaining more precise and consistent results in line with the study's expectations
is anticipated
3.6.3. Set Up: Models and boundary conditions
On one hand, it is important to highlight that the primary model employed for conducting
these types of experiments is the "Fuel Cell and Electrolysis Model" implemented by
ANSYS Fluent, whose detailed explanation can be found in the theoretical section of this
work [¡Error! No se encuentra el origen de la referencia.]. This model stands out for its
remarkable customization capability, providing researchers with the ability to tailor it

according to the specific specifications of each experiment. It is noteworthy to mention
that all parameters that can be modified in this model exactly coincide with those used in
the first simulation carried out in section [3.2.3]. It is decided to use the same parameters
to evaluate and compare results across different simulations.
On the other hand, it is chosen to maintain the same set of boundary conditions as used
in the first simulation, for the same reason that justified the choice of the simulation model.
The only modification made is found in the second simulation: the direction of flow in the
cathode is reversed [3.3.3], so that both flows circulate in the same direction.
3.6.4. Initialization and solution
The choice of initialization method in this context is a critical component to ensure an

accurate comparison with previous iterations. The Hybrid Initialization method in ANSYS
Fluent stands out for its ability to blend user-provided information, such as boundary
conditions, with data derived from the physical model, in this case, the fuel cell and
electrolysis model. This synergy of data can lead to not only faster convergence but also a
more precise and reliable solution.
To initiate the simulation, ten iterations are performed with a convergence criterion set at
10−6. This approach allows for the adjustment and optimization of initial parameters to
reach a state closer to steady-state. Subsequently, the simulation runs until it finally
reaches a equilibrium state.
This simulation process consists of a total of 200 iterations, which, considering the
complexity of the model and the calculations involved, results in approximately
simulation duration of around half an hour.
3.6.5. Results
In this section, the focus is on result validation, specifically ensuring that the temperature
and current density values fall within a coherent and expected range. This selection is
based on the observation of the results from the last PEMFC simulation, the second
iteration, as these values were significantly high, indicating a potential error in that
simulation.
Therefore, to ensure the integrity and accuracy of the results obtained in this current
simulation, the decision has been made to concentrate solely on these two critical
parameters. Validating temperature and current density is crucial, as it provides a clear
and direct indication of the thermal and electrical behavior of the system.
Page 66 Report
3.6.5.1. Temperature
The Fig. 27 provides an isometric view of the temperature distribution on all external
surfaces of the cell. It's worth noting that the hottest region is located in the Proton
Exchange Membrane (MEA), which is entirely consistent, as the reaction taking place is
exothermic, resulting in a temperature increase at this point.
Furthermore, it is evident that both fluid flows and the two ends of the cell are maintained
at the temperature imposed by the boundary conditions, which is 353.15 K. This finding
corroborates the effectiveness of the established conditions and reflects an expected
behaviour in the system.
With this simulation and the implemented improvements, satisfactory results have been
achieved in terms of temperature distribution. This progress represents a significant
milestone in the ability to simulate a fuel cell with precision and reliability.
Fig. 27. Isometric view of thermal distribution in the PEMFC

3.6.5.2. Current density
The implemented improvements in the membrane mesh have proven effective in

addressing both temperature and current density issues. This progress is particularly
evident when observing the colour map of current density in Fig. 28. The values now fall
within a much more normalized range, fluctuating between 0 and 3900 A/m^2, in contrast
to the results of the last PEMFC simulation.
It is interesting to note that the highest current density values are concentrated in the
membrane and the current collectors. This trend is expected, as the membrane is where
the electrochemical reaction takes place, transforming hydrogen and oxygen into water
and electricity. At this point, current density is especially high due to the generation of
protons and electrons, leading to the conversion of chemical energy into electrical energy.
The electrons, in turn, move towards the collectors, responsible for capturing and directing
them towards external circuits. This active circulation of electrons in the collectors
contributes to maintaining the current density at significant levels.
Furthermore, in the image, two blue stripes can be observed, corresponding to the
massive flows of hydrogen and oxygen. Although they show a current density of zero,
since they are electrically non-conducting fluids, their role is of utmost importance, as they
provide the necessary reactants for the electrochemical reaction.
Fig. 28. Current flux density of PEMFC

Page 68 Report
4. Discussion
This section can be incorporated into the final section of the last simulation, as its aim is to
clarify the obtained results by delving into the reasons behind those values. Although
some aspects of temperature and current density have been addressed, we will proceed
to examine various flow parameters that will shed light on the reaction process.
Additionally, we will analyse the impact of the electrical potential on the fuel cell
4.1. Mass Flow Behaviour
The focus on the study of mass flows involves a comprehensive evaluation of critical
aspects. This encompasses the analysis of temperatures along the channels, as well as
the consideration of the quantities of species present. All these elements combine to
provide a deeper and more detailed understanding of the reaction taking place in the cell.
Firstly, the correct execution of the electrochemical reaction is verified. To do this, the
mass fractions of the reactants, hydrogen in the anode and oxygen in the cathode along
the channel are examined. This detailed analysis is reflected in Fig. 29 and Fig. 30 which
provide a visual representation of the middle of the channels. In the representation, the
flows enter from the left and exit from the right. These graphical representations offer a
clear and concise insight into the behaviour of concentrations along the channels,
enabling a precise assessment of the effectiveness of the electrochemical reaction in the
cell.
Fig. 29. Hydrogen mass fraction on anode channel
The observation in Figure 27 reveals a decrease in the mass fraction of hydrogen along
the channel, which is entirely consistent with the expected behaviour in a PEMFC. This
reduction is due to consumption during cell operation, a natural and anticipated
phenomenon. It is crucial to remember that in a real world scenario, to maintain
sustainable cell operation, a continuous supply of hydrogen is necessary.
Additionally, it is clearly noticeable that a value of 0.6 has been imposed at the fluid inlet,
corresponding to a specific condition at the anode at the point of entry (inlet).
Fig. 30. Oxygen mass fraction on cathode channel
In PEMFCs, the oxygen required for the reduction reaction at the cathode is not supplied
in pure form but typically comes from ambient air. The air is primarily composed of oxygen
(O₂) and nitrogen (N₂), as well as other gases in lower concentrations.
The concentration of oxygen in the air is approximately 21% in terms of mass fraction.
This means that only 21% of the air entering the fuel cell is composed of oxygen.
When air is introduced into the fuel cell through the cathode is reduced to oxygen ions
and then combines with protons to form water. Fig. 31 shows how the mass fraction of
water increases along the cell.
It's important to note that the air supply is essential for the operation of a PEMFC.
However, it's also crucial to ensure that the air is clean and free from contaminants that
could potentially damage the cell.
Fig. 31. Water mass fraction on cathode channel
4.2. Temperatures at the MEA
Once it's confirmed that the chemical reaction is taking place, let's examine the effects it
has on the cell temperatures. To do this, six planes are created along the Z-axis to
observe how the temperature is altered as the reaction progresses, Fig. 32. Additionally,
in the image, bottom right, you can observe the section of the cell where the fluids enter,
and bottom left, where they exit.
Page 70 Report
Fig. 32. Temperatures along the cell

The hottest area throughout the entire cell is located at the center of the MEA, specifically
at the cathode catalyst. These points reach higher temperatures mainly due to the
chemical reaction. The formation of water from hydrogen and oxygen is exothermic,
meaning it releases heat into its surroundings, thus causing a temperature increase.
For this very reason, as the reaction produces more water, more heat is released, which
is reflected in a temperature increase at the outlet. This can be clearly observed in the
areas painted with higher temperature colours in Figure 12, which displays a plane right at
the centre of the cell.
Fig. 33.Temperatures at the middle of the cell
It's important to note that, although the overall reaction is exothermic, there may also be
other secondary reactions and processes within the fuel cell that could influence the
temperature. For example, there may be energy losses in the form of heat due to
electrical resistances in the system, unwanted secondary reactions, among other factors.
4.3. Electric potential
Once a comprehensive understanding of how a PEMFC operates and how the reaction
affects temperature and flows has been obtained, a crucial stage in the simulation
process is initiated: the effect on cell performance due to variation of the cell's electrical
potential. This parameter, not addressed until now, plays a fundamental role in the
behaviour of the fuel cell.
By modifying this parameter, different operating conditions are explored, allowing for an
understanding of how the variation in electrical potential impacts electrochemical
phenomena and, consequently, energy generation.
This new iterative phase represents an essential step in the optimization and detailed
understanding of the fuel cell, as it provides valuable information about the system's
behaviour under various configurations. In this way, progress is made towards a complete
Page 72 Report
and precise characterization of the PEMFC, laying the groundwork for future research and
developments in this area of study.
The variation of the electrical potential in the cell is a crucial element in the study of its
behaviour and performance. In this process, specific attention has been given to a
particular parameter: the cathode potential. Starting from 0.1 V and increasing in
increments of 0.1 V up to 0.9 V, a total of nine simulations have been conducted. Each of
these iterations has yielded two key values: the average current density in MEA and the
increase of average temperature in the same region, taking 353.15K as the initial value.
The new analysis involves carrying out eight additional simulations, each consisting of
200 iterations, which has required approximately 5 hours of processing. Table 23
succinctly presents the values previously mentioned, which will be used to generate a
polarization curve and a graph that relates temperatures to voltage. These graphs will
provide a visual representation of how the cell's performance varies based on the applied
electrical potential.
Iteration Electric Potential [V] Temperature Average current

increases [K] 𝑨
density [𝒎𝟐]
1 0,1 1,34 8307,463
2 0,2 0,969 8007,463
3 0,3 0,7514 7412,155
4 0,4 0,7644 7031,664
5 0,5 0,6067 5571,306
0 0,6 0,3421 4497,661
6 0,7 0,2925 3035,883
7 0,8 0,1464 1097,668
8 0,9 0,1034 305,540

Table 23. Calculated values at each iteration
4.3.1.1. Polarization Curve
Generating the polarization curve from the data presented in Table 23, as shown in Image
43, constitutes a crucial step in the understanding and analysis of the fuel cell's behaviour.
This tool provides a detailed insight into the underlying physics in the cell under different
electrical potential conditions, allowing for the identification of optimal operation and
efficiency points.
The polarization curve represents the relationship between current density and cell
voltage, offering a graphical representation of how these two parameters interact. For the
construction of this curve, the average current density in the MEA has been taken into
consideration. This region is critical because it's where the chemical reaction occurs,
releasing protons and electrons, making it the surfaces with the highest electrical activity.
Table 24. Polarization curve
In the curve, three regions can be observed: a first one from 1V to 0.8V , a second one
from 0.8V to 0.4V, and a third one from 0.4V to 0.1V [1] .
The first region, known as the activation region, is located on the left side of the curve. It is
characterized by a rapid drop in potential. This potential drop is due to the speed of
electrochemical reactions at the electrodes. The rate at which these reactions occur may
not be high enough to meet the demand for electrical current. Therefore, as the current
density increases, the voltage drop in the cell becomes more pronounced.
Page 74 Report
The second region corresponds to the ohmic region, located in the central part of the
curve. In this more or less linear zone, there is a much more subdued potential drop
compared to the other two, but it is not zero. This small power loss is mainly due to the
internal resistances of the cell: catalyst, possible contact resistances, and above all, the
resistance of the membrane.
The third and final region corresponds to the mass transport losses region, located to the
right in the image. The voltage drop occurs due to the diffusion process of the reactants.
Some of the reactants are consumed more rapidly, causing a drop in the cell's potential.
Fig. 34 shows how each of the losses affects to the polarization curve theoretically.
Fig. 34.Contributions of the losses to the polarization curve[1]
4.3.1.2. Study of temperature
The graph shown in Fig. 35 illustrates how changes in voltage affect the temperature in
the Acidic Electrolyte Membrane (MEA). The potential values are indicated on the Y-axis,
while the increase in degrees Celsius experienced by the MEA is shown on the X-axis.
A detailed analysis of this graph reveals a trend: as the potential decreases, so does the
temperature in the MEA. This relationship is consistent with the nature of the
electrochemical reaction taking place in the cell. If we reduce the electric potential, it
means that we increase the current density. However, at the same time, the potential loss
increases the cell's power, leading to an increase in heat dissipation.
This analysis provides an enlightening view of how electrical potential directly influences
the thermal conditions of the cell, which can be highly relevant for adjusting and optimizing
the performance of the PEMFC.
Fig. 35. Evolution of MEA temperatures

Page 76 Report
5. Economic assessment
To calculate the expenses involved in the experimentation with fuel cells, the project
carried out by Alessandro d'Adamo, Matteo Riccardi, Massimo Borghi, and Stefano
Fontanesi has been taken. The project includes two CFD simulations and a third one with
an experimental apparatus [8].
Table 12 provides a detailed estimate of the cost of the necessary elements to carry out
the experiment. It includes the price of laboratory equipment, as well as any other material
or device required for the successful execution of the experiment. All prices can be
consulted in the references: [9],[10],[11],[12],[13],[14],[15] and [16].
Experimental Costs
TOTAL (€)
ANODE Quantity Import
Hy-PEM XP 2000 1 15.000 € 15.000 €
One way valve 1 43 € 43 €
CATHODE Quantity Import
Air compressor 1 143 € 143 €
Manual Valve 1 9€ 9€
MEA Quantity Import
Membrane (Nafion) 1 23 € 23 €
Catalyst (Platinum) 2 700 € 1.400 €
Gdl (carbon fiber) 2 100 € 200 €
OTHER
Voltage Source 1 58 € 58 €
TOTAL: 16.876,00€
Table 25. Experimental costs
The following budget, shown in table 27, encompasses the costs of the CFD simulation,
the comparison of the results with the experimental values, and the expenses related to
personnel and equipment used. Additionally, it has been assumed that the entire project
has had a duration of 4 weeks, which equals 28 working days.
CFD Costs
TOTAL (€)
SOFTWARE Quantity Import
LabVIEW license 4 license/month 3.111 €/año 1.037,00 €
SIMCENTER STAR
1 license/month 30000 €/año 2.500,00 €
license
HARDWARE Quantity Useful Life Import
Intel Xeon X5660 2.80

GHz processor and 5 48 month 1500,00 € 156,35 €
48 GB RAM
STAFF Personal Days Worked Salary
Engineer Salaries 4 28 days 15 €/año 13.440,00€
Rental and office

supplies, electricity, 1.500,00 €
gas, water
TOTAL: 18.633,35 €
Table 26. CFD costs
Page 78 Report
Table 23 provides the total of both expenses, with a 10% margin for potential unexpected
costs. Finally, it is estimated that a project involving laboratory experimentation, multiple
CFD simulations, and a team of 4 engineers would be approximately 39,000 euros
TOTAL (€)
Experimental Costs 16.876,00€
CFD Costs 18.633,35 €
Unexpected cost (10 %) 3.550,94 €
TOTAL: 39.060,29 €
Table 27. Economic budget
6. Environmental assessment
One of the areas where hydrogen fuel cells have great potential for further growth is the
transportation sector. This sector was one of the first to implement PEMFC cells in a
sustainable manner, paving the way for the widespread use of hydrogen as an energy
carrier.
Daniel Garraín and Yolanda Lechón [13] have studied the comparison of environmental
impacts in the manufacturing and recycling process of a fuel cell mounted in different
urban vehicles: minibuses, wheelchairs, scooters, and bicycles.
The environmental analysis was carried out in the manufacturing process and waste
treatment of a bicycle cell with a power of 200 W and a lifespan of around 16,000 km. The
main categories studied were climate change, the use of fossil energies, and
𝑆𝑂 2 emissions. The 𝐶𝑂2 emissions for this bicycle are estimated at 2.49 g of 𝐶𝑂2 per km,
which is around 40 kg of 𝐶𝑂2 over its entire lifespan. The use of fossil energies is
estimated at 720 MJ and 𝑆𝑂 2 emission amounts to over half a kilogram.
Fig. 36. Enviromental contribution of materials and processes [13]
Fig. 36 shows the contribution of the environmental impact of each part of the fuel cell,
Page 80 Report
including the proportion from the assembly process, due to energy consumption. The
components responsible for the main impacts on global warming and fossil energy use
are related to the pump, the heat sink, and the circuit board. In the acidification category,
both the pump and the catalyst are the main components of the fuel cell that increase the
impact value. The main reasons for these contributions are the quantity and type of
material they are made from. The pump is made of plastic, aluminium, and copper, the
catalyst is made of platinum, the heat sink is made of aluminium, and the circuit board is
made of tin.
The important metals in the cell, such as tin, copper, and aluminium, are fully recyclable,
and although the reuse of the platinum present in the catalysts is not as efficient, it can
also be recycled. For this reason, 99% of the environmental impact is caused by the
manufacturing of the cell. If we consider that the cell has been constructed with recycled
metals, the environmental impact decreases significantly, especially in terms of carbon
footprint and 𝑆𝑂 2 emission, as observed in Table 28. Ecological impact of recycled materials
New metals Recycled metals
Climate Change 39840 𝑔 𝐶𝑂2 25896 𝑔 𝐶𝑂2
Energy Fossil Use 720 MJ 655 MJ
Acidification 0,5376 𝐾𝑔 𝑆𝑂2 0,178 𝐾𝑔 𝑆𝑂2

Table 28. Ecological impact of recycled materials
7. Social and gender equality assessment

In section [2.3], a study was conducted on the software and topics of 60 scientific articles
related to the subject addressed in this TFG. A gender study of the authors has been
carried out for this study.
The gender of the 237 authors has been determined based on their names. If they had
male first names, they were counted as male, and if they had female names, they were
counted as female. In this way, there are several authors who have not been included in
either of the two categories because they had names from Eastern countries where the
gender was not certain or only surnames were provided. The results of this study are
shown in image 12.
Fig. 37.Gender distribution
It can be observed that almost 75% of the authors are male, indicating a significant
gender imbalance in the scientific field. The low number of women, only 16%, may be due
to:
 Historical and cultural thoughts: In many scientific disciplines, there has

historically been an underrepresentation of women. This may be due to cultural
norms, institutional barriers, and entrenched gender stereotypes.
 Access to education and opportunities: In some parts of the world, women

may face additional challenges in accessing education and opportunities in
science and technology.
Page 82 Report
 Gender stereotypes in specific areas: Some areas of science may be more

associated with gender stereotypes than others. For example, STEM (Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) disciplines have historically had an
unequal representation of women.
Increasing the number of women in science is an important goal for promoting gender
equity and harnessing the full human potential in the scientific field. Here are some
strategies that can help achieve this:
 Promoting STEM education from an early age: Fostering interest and

participation of girls in activities and programs related to science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics from childhood.
 Eliminating gender stereotypes: Promoting a culture that challenges gender

stereotypes and promotes the idea that women can succeed in any field.
 Raising awareness of the achievements of women scientists: Recognizing

and celebrating the achievements of women scientists to inspire others and
demonstrate that it is possible to have a successful career in science.
8. Conclusions
The conclusions of the work will be based on everything learned during the practical part
and the results obtained. First and foremost, it has been confirmed that the scientific
community is constantly researching electrolysis and its various types, with the majority of
these investigations involving CFD studies. It has also been observed that the most
commonly used software is ANSYS, which is why it was chosen to carry out the
simulations.
Regarding the simulations, it is important to highlight various changes made during the
research process. The Membrane Electrode Assembly (MEA) must be small enough for
the reaction to occur; otherwise, the simulation will not start or will not converge. When
meshing, it must be uniform and small enough to avoid creating singular points that distort
the obtained results.
In relation to the main objective of the work, two conclusions were obtained, one for each
of the parameters studied: the increase in temperature and current density.
Regarding the first parameter, it was observed that the temperature decreases as the
electrical potential decreases. These results are consistent with expectations, as a
decrease in electrical potential leads to a decrease in the potential cell and, consequently,
a increase in heat dissipation.
To analyse the second parameter, a polarization curve was created. In this curve, it is
evident that the current density increases as the potential decreases, and three distinct
regions can be clearly distinguished. The left region corresponds to activation losses, the
central region to ohmic losses, and the right region to mass transport losses.
Finally, it is important to emphasize a conclusion not only from this work but from any
CFD study. In this field, there are many factors that can lead to failures and sometimes it
may not be possible to identify the exact reason for the failure. That's why it is crucial to
tackle simpler problems first, as successfully solving them can lead to a better
understanding of the initial problem. And most importantly, PATIENCE!
Page 84 Report
9. Appreciations
I want to express my sincere gratitude to my tutor Elisabet for all the meetings we have
had and for the valuable advice she has given me during these almost 6 months. Your
support has been essential in keeping me motivated even in moments when it seemed
like nothing was working.
10. Bibliography
[1] Hatti, M., Meharrar, A., & Tioursi, M. (2011). Power management strategy in the alternative
energy photovoltaic/PEM fuel cell hybrid system. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, 15(9), 5104-5110.
[2] Javier Brey, LA ELECTRÓLISIS COMO UNA HERRAMIENTA CLAVE DE LA

DESCARBONIZACIÓN DEL SIGLO XXI, Economía Industrial Núm.424: Hidrógeno
Renovable Ministerio de Industria, Comercio y Turismo.
[3] ANSYS,INC. ANSYS Fluent Advanced Add-On Modules guide. Release 17.0.
January 2016
[4] ANSYS,INC. Ansys Fluent User's Guide. Release 2023R1. January 2023
[5] ANSYS Fluent: descripción general del modelo de celda de combustible PEM
(PEMFC).[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGIrCgiQ2d4]
[6] Ansys Fluent PEMFC Tutorial (2020R2). conor twohig.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ozl9BMf4Sk]
[7] UNIVERSIDAD POLITECNICA DE MADRID. ESCUELA TÉCNICA SUPERIOR DE

INGENIEROS INDUSTRIALES. Estudio teórico-práctico de una cèl·lula de
combustible. Madrid,2016.
[8] d’Adamo, A., Riccardi, M., Borghi, M., & Fontanesi, S. (2021). CFD modelling of a
hydrogen/air PEM fuel cell with a serpentine gas distributor. Processes, 9(3), 564.
[9] Hy-PEM XP Pro. Fuel Cell Store: Education, Research and Fun since 1999.
[https://www.fuelcellstore.com/index.php?route=product/search&search=Hy-
PEM%20XP%20Pro]
[10] Compresor silencioso DST STANLEY FATMAX 101/8 6l de depósito, LEROY

MERLIN. [https://www.leroymerlin.es/productos/herramientas/compresores-y-
accesorios/compresores-de-aire/compresor-silencioso-dst-stanley-fatmax-101-8-6l-
de-deposito-82360957.html]
[11] Membrana de intercambio de protones. Aliexpress

[https://es.aliexpress.com/i/32955897438.html]
[12] Acero inoxidable SS304 Válvula de bola. AMAZON España.[

https://www.amazon.es/dp/B07PVFCJ6X/ref=sspa_dk_detail_0?pd_rd_i=B07PVFC
J6X&pd_rd_w=iBWzW&content-id=amzn1.sym.9c67f205-18e7-4d34-beb2-
37ec708092ed&pf_rd_p=9c67f205-18e7-4d34-beb2-
Page 86 Report
37ec708092ed&pf_rd_r=8JV2B6332H66X4B2PH7E&pd_rd_wg=Y6X5Z&pd_rd_r=4
f7e3db4-da3e-4e14-
bd48838b6fe4eb42&s=tools&sp_csd=d2lkZ2V0TmFtZT1zcF9kZXRhaWw&th=1]
[13] Garraín, D., & Lechón, Y. (2014). Exploratory environmental impact assessment of
the manufacturing and disposal stages of a new PEM fuel cell. International journal
of hydrogen energy, 39(4), 1769-1774.
[14] Platinum Catalyst. Fuel Cell Store: Education, Research and Fun since 1999.
[https://www.fuelcellstore.com/product/product&product_id=154]
[15] Gas Diffusion Layer Variety Kit. Fuel Cell Store: Education, Research and Fun since
1999 [https://www.fuelcellstore.com/product/product&product_id=594]
[16] Fuente Alimentación Regulable Digital 305D BAKU. TEL 2U.

[https://www.tel2u.com/fuentes-de-alimentacion/fuente-alimentacion-regulable-
digital-305d-baku-8435502831555-
1965187.html?gclid=Cj0KCQjwmICoBhDxARIsABXkXlJdhu0Iow2QW2Eqo7OYyIfa
gaeRBla6MKX8nSueBg6eCg2PRm2-uCgaAhBzEALw_wcB]
[17] Licencias LabView. LabView. [https://www.ni.com/es/shop/labview/select-

edition.html]
[18] Price of Star-CD or Star-CCM+.CFD fòrum.

Modeling of Hydrogen Electrochemical Processes With ANSYS-Fluent - Javier León Juan Universidad Barcelona

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Modeling of Hydrogen Electrochemical Processes With ANSYS-Fluent - Javier León Juan Universidad Barcelona

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Treball de Fi de Grau

Grau en Enginyeria en Tecnologies Industrials

Modeling of Hydrogen Electrochemical

Author: Javier León Juan

Escola Tècnica Superior

Finalment, es realitza un estudi bibliogràfic de 60 articles relacionats amb la dinàmica de

Sin embargo, se han encontrado diversos desafíos, como la falta de inicialización en la

Finalmente, se realiza un estudio bibliográfico de 60 artículos relacionados con la

Finally, a literature review of 60 articles related to computational fluid dynamics and

2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND _____________________________ 19

3. SIMULATIONS OF PEMFC IN ANSYS-FLUENT_________________ 39

3.2. Learning concepts. First simulation ............................................................. 40

3.2.3.1. Model options ....................................................................................... 42

3.2.3.2. Model parameters ................................................................................ 43

3.2.3.3. Current collectors ................................................................................. 44

3.2.3.4. Gas Diffusion Layers ............................................................................ 44

3.2.3.5. Catalyst Layers..................................................................................... 45

3.2.4.2. Walls .................................................................................................... 46

3.3.2.1. MEA refinement.................................................................................... 50

3.3.2.2. Channel refinement .............................................................................. 51

3.3.2.3. Global vision of the mesh ..................................................................... 52

3.6.4. Initialization and solution ................................................................................. 65

3.6.5.1. Temperature ......................................................................................... 66

3.6.5.2. Current density ..................................................................................... 67

4.3.1.2. Study of temperature ............................................................................ 74

5. ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT _________________________________ 76

Abbrevations and Symbols

CFD: Computational Fluid Dynamics

PEM: Polymeric Exchange Membrane

PEMFC: Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell.

PEMEC: Proton Exchange Membrane Electrolyzer Cell

SOEC: Solid Oxide Electrolysis Cell

MEA: Membrane Electrode Assembly

gdl: gas diffusion layers

Re: Reynolds (dimensionless)

Fig. 2. Software statistics ................................................................................................. 26

Fig. 3. Boundary conditions............................................................................................. 27

Fig. 4. Frontal view of the study cell ................................................................................ 35

Fig. 5. Steps to follow to simulate .................................................................................... 38

Fig. 6. Geometry of the first cell ...................................................................................... 40

Fig. 7. Mesh num.1.......................................................................................................... 42

Fig. 9. Flow channel schematic ....................................................................................... 46

Fig. 12. New mesh quality criteria ................................................................................... 50

Fig. 13. MEA refinement for second simulation ............................................................... 51

Fig. 14. Anode inlet mesh ............................................................................................... 51

Fig. 15. Global vision of the second mesh....................................................................... 52

Fig. 16. Modified mass flow direction .............................................................................. 53

Fig. 17. New boundary conditions ................................................................................... 55

Fig. 18. Temperature distribution in the middle of the cell ............................................... 56

Fig. 19. Electrolyte mesh used ........................................................................................ 57

Fig. 20. Corner of the membrane in isometric view ......................................................... 58

Fig. 21. Third mesh ......................................................................................................... 59

Fig. 22. Temperature at the middle of the geometry ....................................................... 60

Fig. 23.Velocity profiles ................................................................................................... 60

Fig. 24. Temperatures of the iteration 1 .......................................................................... 62

Fig. 25. Temperatures of the iteration 2 .......................................................................... 62

Fig. 26. Temperatures of the iteration 3 .......................................................................... 63

Fig. 27. Isometric view of thermal distribution in the PEMFC ........................................... 66

Fig. 28. Current flux density of PEMFC ........................................................................... 67

Fig. 29. Hydrogen mass fraction on anode channel ........................................................ 68

Fig. 30. Oxygen mass fraction on cathode channel ........................................................ 69

Fig. 31. Water mass fraction on cathode channel ........................................................... 69

Fig. 32. Temperatures along the cell ............................................................................... 70