Mathematical Model of a Gas Diffusion Electrode
Bonded to a Polymer Electrolyte
Dawn M. Bernardi and Mark W . Verbrugge
Physical Chemistry Dept., General Motors Research Laboratories, Warren, MI 48090
A mathematical modelf o r an ionexchange membrane attached to a gasfedporous
electrode is derived and discussed. The model is applied to simulate the oxygen
electrode of apolymerelectrolytefuel cell. Our discussionfocuses on cellpolarization
characteristics, water transport, and catalyst utilizationall of which must be con
sidered for fuelcell design. Calculated polarization behavior is shown to compare
favorably with published experimental data. Our results indicate that if the membrane
maintains full saturation, its contribution to the total cell resistance is most significant
at higher operating current densities (greater than 200 mA/cm2). Polarization re
sistance due to the oxygen reduction reaction appears to be important f o r allpractical
current densities. Water transport, driven by pressure and electricpotentialforces,
is shown to be a complicated function of the cell operating conditions. The utilization
and distribution of noblemetal catalyst is discussed.
Introduction
It has been projected that in the not too distant future, the corrosion problems in the polymerelectrolyte fuel cell are re
world population will double its current value and the global duced and cell construction is simplified. Operation of poly
consumption of energy will have increased by a factor of five merelectrolyte cells, however, is complicated by the electro
(Lindstrom, 1988). Such predictions offer motivation for the osmotic flow of water through the PSA membrane poresthe
development of efficient power generators. In addition, it is conductivity of the membrane depends strongly on its water
desirable to design our future power systems so that only benign content, and during cell operation the membrane can become
waste products are generated, modular construction is af dehydrated, leading to a prohibitively resistive electrolyte and
forded, and quiet operation is observed. The recent develop cell failure (Rieke et al., 1987). Once the heat, mass, and
ment of perfluorosulfonicacid (PSA) polymerelectrolyte fuel momentum transport characteristics are known, it should be
cells (McElroy and Nuttall, 1982; Nuttall and McElroy, 1983; possible to optimize the cell construction and operation as has
Watkins, 1988; Ticianelli et al., 1988a,b) presents a promising been done for previous fuelcell systems (Van Winkle and
approach to addressing our expanding energy requirements for Carson, 1963; Newman, 1979).
stationary and vehicular applications. [The polymer electrolyte It is the purpose of this study to develop the mathematical
in these fuel cells is also referred to as an ionexchange mem framework necessary to simulate a fuelcell electrode bonded
brane (IEM), a protonexchange membrane (PEM), or a solid onto a membrane, a first step toward the development of a
polymer electrolyte.] complete fuelcell model. This is the first membraneelectrode
The premier advantage associated with fuel cells is that they model to include electroosmotic convection, which, as alluded
are not limited by Carnot efficiency. No gases are heated to to above, is of critical importance to cell operation.
create explosive reactants, and no moving parts similar to Recent work and references to past work on gasdiffusion
pistons and crankshafts are required to convert thermal energy electrode and membraneelectrode models can be found in the
into mechanical energy. The energy released from the inter articles by Bjornbom (1986, 1987), Savinell and Fritts (1988),
atomic bonds of the reactants is converted more efficiently Fritts and Savinell (1989), Yang et al. (1989), Ridge et al.
into usable electrical energy relative to traditional powergen (1989), Viitanen and Lampinen (1990), and Giordano et al.
erating devices. Because no mobile electrolyte is employed, (1991). In addition, the earlier series of articles by Burshtein
et al. (1971, 1972) and by Chirkov et al. (1975a,b) are helpful
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to D. M. Bernardi particularly in classifying the different model approaches for
AIChE Journal August 1991 Vol. 37, No. 8 1151
Mathematical Model
Membrane
\
, Active
Catalyst
Layer A membrane bonded to a gas diffusion electrode is shown
in Figure 1. The gas diffusion electrode is composed of elec
tronicallyconductive material that has been made substantially
hydrophobic by the addition of PTFE. The system is consid
ered to be composed of three regions: a membrane region of
hydrated PSA polymer electrolyte, an active catalyst layer,
which is formed by the overlap of the membrane and the gas
diffusion electrode, and a region termed the gas diffuser. The
portion of the gas diffusion electrode that does not contain
membrane, which we call the gas diffuser, provides three types
of avenues for species transport:
+ I \ 1. Electrons move through the electronicallyconductive
Z / Gas portion consisting of carbon and catalyst (represented by the
GasDiffusion Chamber blackened area of the gas diffusion electrode in Figure 1).
Cathode 2. Gaseous species (clear area) move through open pores
wetproofed by PTFE.
3 . Liquid water (stippled portion) flows through channels
that are not lined with PTFE.
Membrane Phase The active catalyst layer is a very thin region, in which dissolved
4 Carbon, PTFE, Catalyst Matrix
gaseous reactants can contact ions supplied by the membrane
and electrochemical reaction can occur at the catalyst sites
(e.g., Pt clusters). In the active catalyst layer, the membrane
Gas Phase 0 2 , N2, H20 phase is depicted as penetrating the wetproofed pores as well
as pores that are not lined by PTFE. (In reality, a fraction of
Liquid Water these pores may not be filled with membrane phase, and the
boundary is diffuse and not sharp as shown in the illustration.)
A gas chamber, which is adjacent to the gas diffuser, supplies
Figure 1. Gas diffusion electrode bonded to a solid pol and exhausts gasphase reactants and liquid water. A reservoir
ymer electrolyte. of liquid water is depicted on the left in Figure I , indicating
that the membrane is always fully hydrated in this study.
porous gas diffusion electrodes and presenting comparisons Figure 1 illustrates the case of an air electrode, which we
between results of experiment and theory. The primary dis focus on throughout this investigation. For the air electrode,
tinguishing difference between these studies and our work is the reactant O2supplied at the gas chamber transports through
the inclusion of electroosmotic and pressuredriven water the porous gas diffuser and dissolves into the polymerelec
transport consonant with a polymerelectrolyte fuel cell. trolyte phase of the active catalyst layer. Protons in the mem
We employ the gasphase transport (Bernardi, 1990) and brane pores can react with dissolved O2at catalyst sites in the
membrane (Verbrugge and Hill, 1990a) models previously de active layer to produce water in the overall electrochemical
veloped in this laboratory to simulate the membrane/electrode reaction. (Electrons for oxygen reduction are supplied to the
system. In addition, we modify traditional porouselectrode electrode through a circuit connected to the counterelectrode,
theory (Tiedemann and Newman, 1975) to address the region which is located at the membranereservoir interface and is not
where the membrane phase and electrode overlap, which we shown in Figure 1.)
refer to as the active catalyst layer. The model, therefore, treats
three distinct regions. Another unique feature of this work is O2+4H++4e=2H,O. (1)
that we simulate the system with only solid electrolyte (as
opposed to both solid and liquid electrolytes) and therefore The direction of water flow through the system will depend
are able to compare our predicted polarization behavior to on the relative magnitudes of electroosmotic forces and pres
experimental results of polymerelectrolyte fuel cellsbith nearly sure forces, both of which are incorporated into the model
reversible hydrogen electrodes (Ticianelli et al., 1988a,b). We formulation. The protons in the pore water of the membrane
do not address the fundamental interactions of gas bubbles are counterions, with positive charge that balances the negative
with poly(tetrafluoroethy1ene) (PTFE) surfaces within the elec charge associated with the fixed charge sites attached to the
trodes. Information regarding this can be found in the work polymer backbone. The pore water is thus positively charged
of Janczuk and Bialopiotrowicz (1989) and references therein. and will tend to be forced toward the electrodedown the
For the present study, we restrict our attention to the oxygen membrane potential gradient.
electrode, which has been the subject of numerous studies The entire system, including the inlet reactant streams, is
(Holze and Vielstich, 1984) and is the limiting electrode (com taken to be held at constant temperature, and the gases are
pared to the relatively efficient hydrogen electrode) of polymer assumed to be ideal. Since the gasphase viscosity is quite small
electrolyte fuel cells. relative to the liquid phase, the total gas pressure within the
We first describe the membraneelectrode model mathe gas diffuser is taken to be constant. The gases in the chamber
matically, and then the model results are analyzed and com are treated as well mixed, and therefore are of uniform com
pared with experimental data. position. For the present study, we consider conditions, in
1152 August 1991 Vol. 37, No. 8 AIChE Journal
Table 1. Governing Equations for FuelCell MembraneElectrode Model
Membrane Catalyst Layer Gas Diffuser
d'$ .
K=IFc~v
dz
dv dv, sw di
=o
dz pdz=nFz
d2c02 dc,
a,  = v    i
O2 d$ dz
where where where
which water is available from either the membrane side or the In the following subsections, we derive the equations con
chamber side of the system: we only consider the case of a sonant with the different regions of the membraneelectrode
fullyhydrated membrane and wetted liquid pores in the gas model and discuss how the model inputs were obtained. The
diffuser. Throughout the gas diffuser, the gas phase is taken resulting steadystate, coupled, nonlinear, differential equa
to be in equilibrium with the liquidwater phase; hence, the tions were solved using Newman's (1973) algorithm.
gasphase concentration of water, expressed as a mole fraction,
is:
Transport in the protonexchange membrane region
The development of the equations for describing the mem
brane portion of the fuelcell electrode model are based on the
Since the membrane and electrode are quite thin relative to macrohomogeneous description given by Verbrugge and Hill
the cell width, a onedimensional macrohomogeneous descrip (1990a). A form of the NernstPlanck equation that includes
tion is appropriate. The equations developed in the following convection is used to describe the flux of species in the mem
sections are summarized in Table 1. Six principal model equa brane pore fluid (Nernst, 1888, 1889; Planck, 1890),
tions are balanced by the following six variables: c,,, i, p,xNz,
4, and +solid. The model employs the following four phenom F
N,= z,,€~V~~),VC,+C,V, (2)
enological equations: RT
1. NernstPlanck equation for ionic transport (Eq. 2 )
2 . modified form of Schlogl's velocity equation (Eq. 7) which states that a dissolved species can move by migration,
3. ButlerVolmer relation (Eq. 15) diffusion, and convection. Since the flow of charge is related
4. StefanMaxwell equation for gasphase transport (Eq. 22). to the current density in the pores of the membrane,
The model is developed by combining these equations along
with conservation of mass and energy in accordance with the
laws of classical physics. i=F z,Ni, (3)
In general, properties of the active catalyst layer are des
ignated by subscript c; those of the gasdiffuser region are
denoted by subscript d; and unsubscripted quantities refer to we can write for the electric potential
membrane properties. Symbols D and 6) are used for gas
phase diffusion coefficients and membranephase diffusion
coefficients, respectively. Also, gasphase and membranephase K K
compositions of species i are expressed as mole fraction x, and
concentration c,, respectively; concentrations c, are based on
the total membrane volume. where the conductivity K is defined as
AIChE Journal August 1991 Vol. 37, No. 8 1153
cies results from application of Eqs. 2 and 9:
aeff
0,v2co,=u. V C O , .
The summations are over all mobile species i. The first term
(Note that the migration term of the NernstPlarick expression
on the right side of Eq. 4 can be thought of as an Ohm's law
vanishes because oxygen is not charged.) Equat.ions 7, 8, 10,
contribution; the second is commonly referred to as the dif
12 and 14, in onedimensional form, are applied in the mem
fusion potential; and the last term represents the effect of the
brane region of the model and are given in the left panels of
potential gradient on the chargedfluid's velocity.
Table 1. Equations 7, 8, 10, and 12 result in
In the absence of specific adsorption of porefluid ions onto
the membrane structure, the following electroneutrality expres
sion applies: V 2 9 = 0 and V2p=O;
zjcj+ C z,c,=o. so the pressure and potential profiles throughout the membrane
region are linear, and the velocity is constant.
,
The fluid dynamics are described by a form of Schogl's Active catalyst layer
equation of motion; electric potential and pressure gradients
The mathematical description of the membrane portion of
generate convection within the pores of the ionexchange mem
the activecatalystlayer region is very similar to the develop
brane (Schlogl, 1955, 1966; Verbrugge and Hill, 1990a):
ment given in the previous section; the major difference results
from current and water conservation equations. The macro
(7) homogeneous approach (Tiedemann and Newnian, 1975) is
taken in developing equations for describing the active catalyst
region of the model. Current in the membrane phase of the
Current conservation, expressed as catalyst layer can transfer to the electronicallyconductive solid
portion of the catalyst layer (that is, carbon and catalyst par
ticles). A ButlerVolmer expression (Newman, 1973; Bard and
Faulkner, 1980)
follows from mass continuity. Along with the steadystate ma
terial balance expression,
with the concentration dependence of the exchange current
the above equations provide a consistent description of trans
density given in the bottom, center panel of Table 1, is used
port in an ionexchange membrane. The equation of continuity
to characterize the potential dependence of the raie of Reaction
for incompressible fluid flow
I (per volume basis).
In this region, we apply material balances based on standard
porouselectrode theory:
can be applied to eliminate the velocity variable from the set
of equations.
For the membrane of a polymerelectrolyte fuel cell, the
only mobile ions in the membrane pore fluid are hydrogen
ions; hence, Eq. 6 can be written as Liquid water is produced by the electrochemical Ieactionfor
mass continuity we apply
That is, the hydrogenion concentration in the membrane pore
fluid can be considered constant, and diffusion is not a mode
of proton transport. This equation can thus be taken as the Equation 12 is applied with an effective membrane con
species material balance, and Eqs. 4 and 5 become ductivity, and Eq. 7 is applied with effective permeabilities.
(The effective properties are discussed in the Parameters and
Properties section.)
The continuity equation for dissolvedoxygen species results
from the application of Eqs. 2, 16 and 17, and contains a
and generation term both from water production and oxygen de
pletion:
respectively. The continuity equation for dissolvedoxygen spe
1154 August 1991 Vol. 37, No. 8 AIChE Journal
The movement of electrons in the solid portion of the catalyst nitrogen and oxygen gas species in the pores are constant, and
layer is governed by Ohm's law there is no net motion of nitrogen because it is considered
inert:
",,g = 0.
Electroneutrality, expressed as
In the gas pores of the cathode, oxygen must diffuse through
both water vapor and nitrogen gas, and only two of the three
StefanMaxwell equations for this system need to be consid
is used to relate the current in the solid carboncatalyst matrix ered. since the relation
to the current in the membrane phase of this model region. In
the onedimensional description, this equation gives 1 =xw+xo,+xN,
+
Z= isolid i, applies.
Combining Eqs. 24, 25 and 26 with Eq. 22, written for the
where Z is the operating current density and is taken to be nitrogengas and watervapor species, one can obtain
negative during operation as a cathode in a (galvanic) fuel cell.
Equations 7, 12, 15, 17 and 19 (along with Eq. 21) apply in
the active catalyst layer. These equations, in onedimensional
form, are given in the middle panels of Table 1.
and
Transport in the gasdiffuser region
The StefanMaxwell equations are the usual starting point
for the description of molecular diffusion in multicomponent
gas mixtures. For the diffusion of an ncomponent idealgas
through a porous medium, these equations take the form Equation 29 can be solved for Nw,gin terms of No2,g and placed
(Hirschfelder et al., 1954; Bird et al., 1960): into Eq. 28. It is convenient to define a dimensionless position
variable,
RT
VX;=  ( x ~ N J , ~  x , N ,i = ) ,...,n,
, ~1,2 (22)
j= I pg,"
where Ni,gis the superficial gasphase flux of species i averaged and a dimensionless flux v,
over a differential volume element, which is small with respect
to the overall dimensions of the system, but large with respect
to the pore size. The quantity DF is an effective binary dif
fusivity of the pair ij in the porous medium. The temperature
and pressure dependency of this diffusivity is discussed in the
Parameters and Properties section. The gasphase oxygen flux is then related to the current
In the gas pores (wetproofed pores) of the gas diffuser, we
assume that the water vapor is equilibrated with the water in
the liquid pores
The material balance equation in terms of the dimensionless
flux u is
which leads to the relation
vxw=o. (24)
Also, we take the volume fraction of gas pores to be uniform
and the gasphase pressure to be uniform throughout the thick
ness of the diffuser lg and equal to the chamber pressure p r . where
If we assume that the water flowing through the gas diffuser
geff
takes up (or gives off) only a negligible amount of dissolved WN,
rw= (34)
0, and N, (compared to the relatively large gasphase concen P
wff
o2
trations), then the equations of continuity for oxygen and
nitrogen gas takes the forms This equation appears in dimensional form in the right column
of Table 1.
Equation 7, with only the pressure gradient term, is used to
characterize the water flow since the fluid is not charged in
respectively. That is, in the steady state, the fluxes of the the gas diffuser. An overall water material balance must include
AIChE Journal August 1991 Vol. 37, No. 8 1155
interaction with the gaseous phase:
(43)
p V 'us=  V . N , , , , (35)
where apply. The superficial flux of liquid water is conrinuous (vl,

 Ern,CV IA
and the watervapor flux N,,, can be defined in terms of ni
(44)
trogen composition by Eqs. 27, 29 and 32. Equation 19, with
=  I , also applies. The equations, in onedimensional
isolid
and the flux of dissolved oxygen is continuous through this
form, that are applied in the gasdiffuser portion of the model
internal boundary:
are given in the right column of Table 1.
An analytic solution for the gasphase composition in the
gas diffuser can be obtained; Eq. 33, in one dimension ( z ) , is
a firstorder, linear, differential equation, which can be solved
for an implicit expression for the nitrogen concentration pro
file: At the catalystlayerlgasdiffuser interface (z = I, + I,), the
current in the solid phase, ( i  Z ) , is continuous
as is the total flux of water (~E,,,E,~,u I = pv, Id i
N,,,)
(37)
where
The boundary condition used was at 4 = 1, xN2 = xk2.We discuss The dissolvedoxygen concentration in the membrane phase
later the determination of the chamber composition x&. Equa of the active catalyst layer is related to the gasphase com
tion 37, however, is not used in our computer code because it position in the gas diffuser by a Henry's law constant Koz
is not explicit in xN2.(We use Eq. 33 directly.) We discuss later defined by:
how this analytic solution can be used in limitingcurrent cal
culations.
."(i=(l XN2X;) .PL (48)
KO,
Boundary conditions
At the membrane (z = 0), the boundary conditions At the face of the gas diffuser, which is in contact with the
chamber (z = L = I, + 1, + 1,) ,
P'PL (49)
and
and
co, = 0 (41)
An expression for xk2in terms of the stoichiometric flow rate
{ can be obtained from an integral material balance on the air
apply. chamber. As mentioned earlier, the chamber gases are assumed
At the membrane/catalystlayer interface ( z = lm),the cur
rent in the membrane phase is continuous; the relations to be of uniform composition and in equilibrium with liquid
water present in the chamber. In this case, the gas composition
in the chamber is not dependent on the amount of water vapor
that enters the chamber with the reactant gas. The watervapor
content will, however, affect the net amount of liquid water
that exits the chamber. We can define the stoichiometric flow
and ratio of reactant gas { as the ratio of the amount of oxygen
1156 August 1991 Voi. 37, No. 8 AIChE Journal
added in the reactant feed to the amount that is required by of about 10 pm, we realize that the value for the thickness
the electrochemical reaction: of the active catalyst layer I, must be in the range
0.05 x 104<Z,< lox cm.
The stoichiometric flow rate { given in this table does not
necessarily correspond to the work of Ticianelli et al., since
they did not report their inlet reactant flow rate. The ther
modynamic opencircuit potential for the overall reaction
where 19 is the gas volumetric flow rate. An overall material
balance on the oxygen species results in
0 2 + 2H2 +2H20 (11)
~x 2:
PL
= ~x
RT
h2RT + N,,#A, or given in Table 2 at basecase conditions was estimated with
the relation (Berger, 1968)
in = out. (52)
(55)
Equations 51 and 52 provide expressions for 19" and 19, re
spectively, which can be substituted into the overall nitrogen
material balance on the chamber The calculation is made taking the reference electrode oper
ating with pure hydrogen at the membraneside pressure po
x :,so =x;,19 (53) and oxygen gas composition in the chamber (i.e., z = L ) . The
reference potential at unit pressure in atmospheres is given by
to yield (Berger, 1968)
U&,rn,= 1.23  0 . 9 ~lO'(T 298), (56)
(54) where temperature in the above two equations is in kelvins.
The partial pressure po2= xo2pL,where xo2= 1  x p  xN2.The
compositions x t t and xN2are given by Eqs. 1 and 54, respec
tively.
For a given value of stoichiometric flow, the composition in The remaining model parameters, as well as methods for
the chamber is independent of current density. interpolation and extrapolation of parameters to operating
temperature, are discussed in the following two sections. Unless
Parameters and properties otherwise indicated, these remaining parameters are assumed
to be independent of pressure.
We compare our model calculations of polarization as a Membrane Properties. The model parameters needed to de
function of operating current density to the experimental re scribe the membrane portion of the mathematical model are
sults of Ticianelli et al. (1988a,b). To the best of our ability, given in Table 3. The parameters correspond to the properties
the model physical parameters for the membrane/electrode of Nafion 117 (of E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company).
system were chosen to correspond to their system. They used The estimated membrane conductivity was obtained by ap
humidified air and Prototechbrand electrodes (20 wt. '70Pt), plying Eq. 13 with the value of the estimated proton diffusivity
onto which they sputtered platinum (50nm equivalent thick that is also given in the Table 3. This value of SH+ at 80°C
ness, total Pt loading of 0.45 mg/cm2) to obtain superior be
havior relative to unsputtered electrodes. Nafion 117 (of E.I.
du Pont de Nemours and Company) was used for the mem Table 3. Membrane Properties at 80°C
brane in the Prototech electrode design. The basecase oper Quantity Value at 80"
ating conditions are given in Table 2. Since Ticianelli et al.
Estimated proton diffusion coefficient, a>,+ 4.5 x lo' cm2/s
report that their membrane penetrates the electrode to an extent Estimated ionic conductivity, K 0.17 mho/cm
Ionic conductivity used to fit data, K 0.07 mho/cm
Fixed charge site concentration,* c, 1.2~ mol/cm3
Charge of fixed (sulfonate) sites, z, 1
Table 2. Physical Parameters for BaseCase Conditions Dissolved oxygen diffusivity, BDo2 t .2 x cm2/s
Electrokinetic permeability,* k+ 1 . 1 3 ~ 1 0  ' 'cm2
Value for Hydraulic permeability, * * kp 1.58 x cm2
Quantity BaseCase Condition Porefluid (water) viscosity,' p 3.565~ kg1m.s
Membrane thickness, I, 0.023 cm Porefluid (water) density,' p 0.054 mol/cm'
Gasdiffusioncathode thickness, I, 0.026 cm Saturated water vapor pressure, pEt 0.467 atm
0.1 x 1 0  ~cm Henry's law constant for oxygen in 2 x lo5 atm.cm3/mol
Activecatalystlayer thickness, I,
Stoichiometric flow, { 3 membrane, Ko2
0.79/0.21 Volume fraction membrane in active layer, 0.5
Inlet nitrogenoxygen mole ratio, x k 2 / x s 2
Airside pressure, p L 5 atm 6fl.c
Membraneside pressure, p o 3 atm Volume fraction water in membrane,* ew,, 0.28
Temperature, T 353 K or 80°C
Thermodynamic opencircuit potential, 1.197 V *Verbrugge and Hill (1990b)
"Fales et al. (1986)
Uthcrmo 'Weast (1977)
AIChE Journal August 1991 Vol. 37, No. 8 1157
was estimated using the relation a)p/T=constant (Bird et al., and is taken to be related to the effective solidphase conduc
1960); from Verbrugge and Hill (1990b), Do,+ = 1 . 4 lo’
~ tivity by the Bruggemantype relation (Meredith and Tobias,
cm2/s at 22°C. A value of 0.07 mho/cm, however, allowed 1962)
for a better fit of the experimental results; both the estimated
and fit conductivity values appear to be reasonable based on
available membrane transport data. The equation given by
Ogumi et al. (1984) Estimates of three gaspair diffusion coefficients D are tff
required in the model. The free diffusion coefficients D,, given
9,,,=3.1 x 103exp ( ,,,,),
 (57)
in Table 4 are estimated with an expression developed from a
combination of kinetic theory and corresponding states ar
guments (Bird et al., 1960):
where T is in kelvins, is used to estimate the value for the
diffusion coefficient of dissolved oxygen in the membrane.
These authors also offer the oxygen solubility in the membrane
at various temperatures, from which we developed the Henry’s
law expression where C, is a tabulated, empiricallydetermined constant, and
C , is a function of the critical properties of the i a n d j species.
Note that the pressurediffusivity product is only a function
( (7).
KO,= 1.33 x 106exp  of temperature; this diffusivity is virtually independent of com
position. We relate the effective diffusion coefficient to the
diffusion coefficient in a nonporous system D,, by
where Henry’s constant is in units of atm.cm3/mol and tem
perature is in Kelvins. For all other parameters, roomtem
perature values are taken to apply at 80°C.
In the active catalyst region of the mathematical model, the
membrane phase is distributed; to reflect this, we use where the gasphase volume fraction E is obtained from the
work of Burshtein et al. (1972). As part of this work, we
measured experimentally the flow of water through a gas dif
fusion electrode with a known pressure differential to obtain
the estimate of the permeability kd,,* given in Table 4.
Reaction I defines the stoichiometric coefficients and elec
The active catalyst layer is assumed to be thin enough that it tron number. The product of exchange current density at ref
is not tortuous and only a porosity correction is necessary. erence composition and active area in Table 4 was obtained
Electrode Parameters and Properties. The parameters re from comparing model calculations to experimental results and
quired to describe the gas diffusion electrode (including the is discussed later. The cathodic transfer coefficient was taken
active catalyst region and the gas diffuser) are given in Table from the work of Maoka (1988). The particular value Qf the
4. The conductivity of the electronicallyconductive carbon anodic transfer coefficient does not significantly affect our
material given in this table is that of graphite carbon (25°C) model results. The oxygen reference concentration is given by
Eq. 48 using the nitrogen composition x&.
Table 4. Electrode Parameters and Properties Results
Quantity Value at 80” Figure 2 compares the calculated airelectrode voltage (rel
ative to a hydrogen reference electrode at 3 atm placed at the
Electronic conductivity of solid (C,Pt),* u 120 mho/cm membrane/reservoir interface, z = 0) to experimental fuelcell
Volume fraction electronically conductive 0.3
solid (C,Pt), eSolid voltage given by Ticianelli et al. (1988a,b) as a function of
Gaspair pressurediffusivity product, 0.279 atm.cmz/s current density. Since they report that the hydrogen electrode
PDO, N, in their fuel cell performed with negligible overpotentials (for
Gaspair pressurediffusivity product, p D , N2 0.387 atm.cm2/s current densities up to 1 A/cmZ), their cell potential data are
Gaspair pressurediffusivity product, P D ~ ,  ~ , 0.370 atm.cm2/s comparable to our calculated potentials for the membrane
Gasphase volume fraction (wetproofed 0.5
pores) E /airelectrode model. The model electrode potential in Figure
Hydraulic permeability (liquid water), k$,s 3.03 x lo’’ cm’ 2 is defined as
Number of electrons, n 4
Stoichiornetric coefficient for water, s, 2
 qtotI r = O ,
Electrode Potential = Uthermo (63)
Stoichiometric coefficient for O,, so, 1
Reference exchange current density times area, 5x A/cm3
aj‘ei
0 where Uthermois defined by Eq. 5 5 and vtot is defined by Eq.
Cathodic transfer coefficient, a, 2 64.
Anodic transfer coefficient, a, Two model parameters were adjusted to obtain the results
Proton reference concentration, c $ = c, 1.2 x lo’ mol/cm’
Oxygen reference concentration, cg: 4.62 x mol/cm3 given in Figure 2: a i r f and K. From 0 to approximately 200
1
mA/cm2, the electrochemicalreaction resistance is responsible
0, concentration parameter for zO, yo,
~ ~~
for most of the polarization, as opposed to potential drop
‘Weast (1977) across the membrane. We, therefore, adjusted the parameter
1158 August 1991 Vol. 37, No. 8 AIChE Journal
c
30 
25 
* .
.B
E
c 20 
B
8 15 
B
 Theory
B 10 
OI
0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800
Cured Dhnsity. m4Lsqwn Ckmt density. mLvsqcm
Figure 2. Polarization at basecase conditions (Tables Figure 4. Model results for membrane resistance as a
2, 3 and 4). percent of the total resistance vs. cell current
The experimental data correspond to the polymerelectrolyte fuel density (basecase conditions).
cell data of Ticianelli et al. (1988a,b), 20 wt. Pt, 50nm Pt sputter.
The solid curve represents our model results for the membrane/
airelectrode potential relative to a hydrogen reference electrode.
with increasing current density due to the greater influence of
ai 2‘ (see Table 4) to give agreement with the experimental potential drop through the membrane, which is illustrated in
results in this low current density range. For current densities Figure 3. Figure 3 shows the total overpotential (as measured
greater than 200 mA/cm2, the potential drop across the mem by an oxygen reference electrode) throughout the membrane
brane becomes an important source of polarization; we ad and catalyst layer for three current densities. In this figure,
justed K (see Table 3) to give agreement with the experimental the total overpotential is defined as
results in this high current density range. Thus, at low current
densities (< 100 mA/cm2), the potential drops rapidly due to
activation overpotential of the oxygen reduction reaction; and
at higher current densities, the potential drops almost linearly and the dimensionless distances are defined as
Figure 3 shows that at 0.1 A/cm2 operating current density,
the membrane does not significantly contribute to the over
potential. At 0.88 A/cmZ, the potential drop through the mem
brane represents a much more appreciable fraction of the total
overpotential. That is, the total overpotential evaluated at
Z , = 0 is approximately 0.60 V, of which about 0.41 V is due
to activation overpotential and 0.19 V is due to the membrane
resistance. For all conditions investigated in this work, the
potential drop through the solid phase is negligible (less than
0.001 V).
000 020 040 060 080 100 Figure 4 shows the fraction of the total overpotential, eval
020
POUf,’n 2
000 040 060 080 100
uated at the membrane/reservoir interface (2,= 0), that is due
POS,brn zc
to the membrane resistance as a function of operating current
Figure 3. Model results for spatial variation of total ov density. Again, we see that resistance through the membrane
erpotential (Eq. 64) through membrane and ac is only a minor contributor to total overpotential for current
tive catalyst regions for various current densities less than 200 mA/cm2.
densities (basecase conditions). Figure 5 shows the distribution of current density (based on
AIChE Journal August 1991 Vol. 37, No. 8 1159
1 .M) .
.
2 1.00 0.15
C
.g o,80
'
Membrane C

.
E
C 0.10 i
a
s"
3
0.05
al
?!
6
 L L . . I I 0.00
0 000 040 080 000 040 080 000 040 080
Zm =C Z!1
Dimensionless Distance
Figure 7. Model results for spatial variation of dissolved
oxygen concentration within membrane and
membrane phase of the catalyst layer for var
ious current densities and basecase operat
Figure 5. Model results for spatial variation of current ing conditions.
The far right panel shows the oxygengas mole fraction within
density within the membrane phase of both the gas diffuser.
membrane and active catalyst regions for var
ious current densities (basecaseconditions).
effect as an increase in the exchange current densitya de
superficial area) within the membrane phase in both the mem crease in reaction overpotential. As one would expect, large
brane region and catalyst layer. The current density is constant values of a are desirable: that is, catalyst should be distributed
throughout the membrane region. In the catalyst layer region, to give a large surface area. The reaction rate is related to .I
the membrane phase gradually transfers its current density to the divergence of the membrane current density as given by
the solid, electronicallyconductive phase (carbon and plati Eq. 15. It corresponds to the coulombs of electrons (Reaction
num) via Reaction I , as indicated by the decrease in i to zero I) transferred from the membrane to the solid phase per unit
at the activecatalyst/diffuser interface. The amount of catalyst volume of the active catalyst region.
enters into the mathematical model through the electrochem Figure 6 gives reactionrate distributions throughout the
icallyactivearea parameter a, which is multiplied by the ex catalyst layer for three operating current densities. For current
change current density i F f wherever it appears in the model. densities less than 0.1 A/cm2, the reaction rate is distributed
An increase in the amount of catalyst, therefore, has the same almost uniformly throughout the catalyst layer: that is, at lower
current density, the catalyst can be utilized most effectively
0.60 3 . . , . , . , . . . , . . . , . .. because the reaction occurs more uniformly throughout the
I
I active layer than at high current density. At higher current
Cata/yst Layer I densities, the distribution corresponds more to the dissolved
I oxygen concentration in the membrane portion of the catalyst
I
layer because the exchange current density is presumed to fol
low the relationship given in the bottom, center panel of Table
1.
0.40 Figure 7 shows dissolvedoxygen concentration profiles in
the membrane and the membrane portion of the catalyst layer,
as well as the gasphase oxygen composition in the gas diffuser.
Similar to the reactionrate distribution, the dissolvedoxygen
concentration in the catalyst layer is nearly uniform for the
low current density result shown. At higher current densities,
the back portion of the catalyst layer (near zc= 0) is depleted
0.20 of dissolved oxygen, because the oxygen cannot diffuse fast
enough to replenish what is consumed via Reaction I. It should
be mentioned that, even though the oxygen concentration is
vanishingly small in the back portion of the catalyst layer for
1>0.5 A/cm2, limiting current conditions are not reached until
co2 tends to zero throughout the whole catalyst layer. If O2
equilibrium exists at the catalystlayer/diffuser interface ( Z , = 0
0.00 and Z,= l), then limiting current conditions will occur when
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 the gasphase composition of oxygen at Z , = 0 tends to zero.
(This is discussed in greater detail in the next paragraph.)
D i m i m l e s s Position Z Therefore, at high current densities, the model results of Fig
Figure 6. Model results for spatial variation of reaction ures 6 and 7 suggest that only a very small portion of the active
rate j throughout active catalyst layer for var catalyst layer can be utilized due to dissolvedoxygen transport
ious current densities (basecase conditions). limitations. These results suggest that, in practice, platinum
1160 August 1991 Vol. 37, No. 8 AIChE Journal
5.5c
I
Membrane
5.m
Catalyst Layer Gas Diffuser
i 4.50
$
8 4.00
3.50
3.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
posifia, 2, Azsifiat z*
PosMm Zc
Figure 8. Model results for spatial variation of pressure within hydrophilic portions of the membrane, catalystlayer,
and gasdiffuser regions for various current densities (basecase conditions).
should be localized at the depth that the membrane penetrates density below 1,000 mA/cmZ. The pressure drop occurs pri
the gas diffusion electrode (z = 1, + 1,) as opposed to the surface marily through the membrane because of the membrane's rel
(z = I , ) . For example, if a given method of affixing the mem atively low permeability. The imposed pressure differential of
brane to the gas diffusion electrode allows the membrane to 2 atm acts to reduce the electroosmoticvelocity effect.
penetrate 5 pm into the electrode, then catalyst should be Figure 9 shows water velocity profiles at three different
localized at the depth of 5 pm. The methods of catalyst im current densities. At an operating current density of 125
pregnation, as well as ways to attach the membrane to the mA/cm2, the pressure gradient term on the right side of Eq.
electrode, must be optimized to approach this situation as 7 dominates, because potential drop through the membrane is
closely as possible. not important at the lower current density. Since the pressure
The composition profiles given for the gas diffuser portion forces dominate the water transport, water flow is toward the
of the model show that oxygen gas transport limitations are membrane (from right to left in Figure 1, or water flows out
essentially nonexistent at these current densities. Equation 37 at z=O). At the higher current density of 175 mA/cm2, the
provides an estimate of the limiting current density based on potential gradient term in Eq. 7 dominates, and water flow is
O2 gas transport. The application of Eq. 37 at the catalyst toward the diffuser (from left to right in Figure 1, or water
layer/gasdiffuser interface (( = 0) with xoz= 0 and xk2= 0.77 flows out at z = L ) .
from Eq. 54 gives the dimensionless limiting current ulim= 0.11 The case also exists at intermediate values of operating cur
for the results of the basecase operating conditions. The dif rent density where the water that is produced within the catalyst
fusionlimited current density of Z,im,02= 7.4 A/cm2 can be es layer will flow out both sides of the membraneelectrode system
timated with ulim, and Eqs. 32 and 31. This current density may
appear high; mass transport limitations are believed to be im
portant at much lower operating current densities (Ticianelli
et al., 1988a,b). It must be realized that in our calculation of
Zlim,o, from v using Eq. 31, we have assumed that the volume
d
0
r
'20
0.80
__ mAlcm2
 175  __  _    _____      
fraction of gas pores E is 0.5. In reality, E may be much lower
because of water blocking the gas pores in nearflooding con
Y
E
0.40 1 Membrane Catalyst Layer Gas Diffuser
ditions, and the effective diffusion coefficient D ewff N1 may tend
to very small values (Eq. 59). This result, however, reflects the
importance of proper wet proofing in the electrode design
if the pores could be kept free of water, then oxygengas trans
port limitations would be seen only at relatively high operating
current densities. Conversely, if an estimate of the actual lim 0.00 0.40 0.80 0.00 0.40 0.80 0.00 0.40 0.80
iting current density were available from experimental results, Zrn ZC 2s
then an estimate of fraction of open pores E at limiting current Dimensionless Distance
conditions could be made. Figure 9. Model results for spatial variation of liquid.
Figure 8 shows the pressure profile within the hydrophilic water velocity within hydrophilic portion of
regions of the membraneelectrode system; the model results the membrane, activecatalystlayer,and gas
indicate that it is essentially independent of operating current diffuser regions (base.case conditions).
AIChE Journal August 1991 Vol. 37, No. 8 1161
as shown for the case of 150 mA/cm2. This case probably in contrast, at high current densities, electroosmotic forces
represents the most preferable mechanism of water transport overcome pressure forces, and water is forced out of the gas
in a polymerelectrode fuel cell, because membrane dehydra chamber side of the electrode. At intermediate current dens
tion will not occur. Unfortunately, our model results suggest ities, the pressure and electroosmotic forces balance and water
that this situation occurs over only a small range of operating flows out both sides of the electrode.
current densitiesapproximately 125 < I < 175 mA/cm2 for the
values of k+, kp,and k$,sgiven in Tables 3 and 4. The situation Notation
results from a balance between pressure forces and electro a = effective catalyst area per unit volume cm2/crn3
osmotic forces and will maintain the membrane in a fully A = superficial electrode area (perpendicular to the z direction),
saturated state. The situation as depicted for I > 175 mA/cm2 cm2
is probably the case for operating conditions of practical pol c = concentration, mol/cm'
ymerelectrolyte fuel cells. A complete model of the polymer
c, = constant in diffusivity expression, Eq. 61
c2 = constant in diffusivity expression, Eq. 61
electrolyte fuel cell as well as more experimental verification a,, = diffusivity of the gas pair ij in a mixture, cm2/s
a > = diffusion coefficient of a membrane species. cm'/s
of the membrane and electrode permeabilities would provide
greater insight into this important aspect of cell operation. f = quantity defined as F / ( R T ) ,V  '
F = Faraday's constant, 96,487 Uequivalent
It should also be mentioned that at low operating current lo = exchange current density, A/cm2
densities (for our base case, I < 125 mA/cm2), there may be I = current density, A/cm2
no advantage to operating with a pressure differential. In this I = cell current density based on superficial electrode area, A/
situation, more water than is produced by the electrochemical cm2
reaction is pushed from right to left in Figure 1, so membrane Il,m,02= diffusionlimiting current density for oxygen, A/cm2
dehydration could occur at the cathode side of the membrane. j = transfer current density, A/cm3
k, = membrane hydraulic permeability, cm2
This may not be as detrimental to fuelcell performance as the
k$,s = hydraulic permeability of diffuser (Eq. 36), cm2
situation with flow from left to right, because it occurs at low k+ = electrokinetic permeability, cm2
operating current densities when membrane resistance is al K = constant defined by Eq. 38
ready relatively insignificant. K O 2 = Henry's constant for oxygen, atm.cm3/mol
The effect of PTFE loading in the gas diffuserthe success I, = thickness of the active catalyst region, cm
1, = thickness of the gas diffuser, cm
of the electrode's wetproofing agentsmanifests itself through
1, = thickness of the membrane region, cm
two parameters k$,s and t. An increase in PTFE loading will n = number of electrons participating in a reaction
increase the volume fraction of wetproofed pores and also n = number of components in a gas mixture
decrease the permeability k$,s.This will also serve to keep the N . = superficial flux of species i, mol/cm2.s
volume fraction of gas pores E high, and reduce gastransport P = pressure, atm
limitations and water flow out the diffuser. P, = partial pressure of species i,x,p, atm
r = diffusivity ratio, Eq. 34
R = universal gas constant, 8.3143 J h o 1 . E ;
Conclusions s = stoichiometric coefficient
T = absolute temperature, K
We have developed a macrohomogeneous description of a
utherrna = thermodynamic, opencircuit potential, V
membrane/airfed electrode, and its predicted polarization be x, = gasphase mole fraction of species i
havior compares well with experimental results. The model u = porewater velocity in membrane, cm/s
gives the relative importance of the various resistances that v, = superficial water velocity, cm/s
can limit fuelcell performance. Resistance due to the oxygen z = distance, cm
z, = charge number of species i (i#B
reduction reaction appears to be important during all practical z = dimensionless distance
operating current densities. If the membrane maintains full
saturation, its resistance becomes significant at current den
sities greater than approximately 200 mA/cm2. Calculations
Greek letters
of reaction rate distributions suggest optimal localization of anodic and cathodic transfer coefficients, respectively
volume fraction of gaseous phase
catalyst. For low current densities, the reaction rate distri volume fraction of membrane in catalyst layer
bution is nearly uniform; at higher current densities, however, volume fraction of solid phase in electrode
the reaction distribution is highly nonuniform, with most of volume fraction of liquid in membrane
the reaction located in the portion of the catalyst layer near stoichiometric flow ratio, Eq. 51
volumetric flow rate, cm3/s
the oxygenrich catalystlayer/gasdiffuserinterface.
membrane conductivity, mho/cm
These results indicate that concentrating catalyst near the porefluid viscosity, g/cm.s
catalystlayer/gasdiffuser interface should prove costeffec dimensionless flux defined by Eq. 31
tive. Obviously, any catalyst outside the region of electrode density of liquid water in the membrane, mol/cm3
membrane overlap (that is, the active catalyst layer of this dimensionless distance
conductivity of the electronicallyconductive phase, mho/
work) is wasted. A novel feature of this work is that we are cm
able to simulate water transport that is driven by pressure and potential, V
electricpotential forces; water transport is known to play a
key role in the operation of polymerelectrolyte cells. Under Subscripts
typical operating conditions, the cathode chamber is pressur
c = catalyst layer region
ized above that of the anode. Our results show that at low d = gas diffuser
current densities, water is forced out from the cathode of the f = membrane species (the fixed charge site species)
membrane side of the electrode by the pressure differential; g = gas phase
1162 August 1991 Vol. 37, No. 8 AIC'hE Journal
i = mobile species i ( i # f ) Lindstrom, O., “That Incredible Fuel Cell,” Chemtech, p. 490 (Aug.,
L = at the chamber/gasdiffuser interface 1988).
lim = limiting current conditions Maoka, T., “Electrochemical Reduction of Oxygen on Small Platinum
m = membrane region Particles Supported on Carbon in Concentrated Phosphoric Acid:
solid = in the solid electronicallyconductive phase I . The Effects of Platinum Content in the Catalyst Layer and Op
w = water erating Temperature of the Electrode,” Electrochim. Acta., 33, 371
0 = at the membrane/reservoir interface (1988).
McElroy, J . F., and L. J. Nuttall, “Status of Solid Polymer Electrolyte
Fuel Cell Technology and Potential for Transportation Applica
Superscripts tions,” IECEC Meeting, Los Angeles, (Aug. 812, 1982).
eff = effective, accounting for porous medium Meredith, R. E., and C. W. Tobias, “Conduction in Heterogeneous
L = at the chamber/gasdiffuser interface Systems,” Advances in Electrochemistry and Electrochemical En
o = inlet to gas chamber gineering 2 , C. W. Tobias, ed., Interscience Publishers, New York
ref = at a reference composition (1962).
sat = saturated condition Nernst, W., “Zur Kinetik der in Losung befindlichen Korper: I. Theo
rie der Diffusion,” 2. Physik Chem., 2, 613 (1888).
Nernst, W., “Die Elektromotorische Wirksamkeit der Jonen: I . Theo
rie der Diffusion,” Z . Physik Chem., 4, 129 (1889).
Newman, J., Electrochemical Systems, PrenticeHall, Englewood
Literature Cited Cliffs, NJ (1973).
Bard, A. J., and L. R. Faulkner, Electrochemical Methods, Wiley, Newman, J., “Optimization of Potential and Hydrogen Utilization
New York (1980). in an Acid Fuel Cell,” Electrochim. Acta, 24, 223 (1979).
Bjornbom, P., “Influence of Diffusion Resistances on Gas Diffusion Nuttall, L. J., and J . F. McElroy, “Technical andEconomic Feasibility
Electrodes,” J. Electrochem. SOC.,133, 1874 (1986). of a Solid Polymer Electrolyte Fuel Cell Powerplant for Automotive
Bjornbom, P., “Modelling of a DoubleLayered PTFEBonded Ox Applications,” SAE IECEC Meeting, Paper No. 830348 (1983).
ygen Electrode,” Electrochim. Acta, 32, 115 (1987). Ogumi, Z., Z. Takehara, and S. Yoshizawa, “Gas Permeation in SPE
Bird, R. B., W. E. Stewart, and E . N. Lightfoot, Transport Phenom Method: I. Oxygen Permeation Through Nafion and NEOSEPTA,”
ena, Wiley, New York, (1960). J . Electrochem. SOC., 131, 769 (1984).
Berger, C., ed., Handbook of Fuel Cell Technology, PrenticeHall, Planck, M., “Ueber die Erregung vol Electricitat und Warme in Elec
Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1968). trolyten,” Ann. d. Phys. u. Chem., 39, 161 (1890).
Bernardi, D. M., “WaterBalance Calculations for SolidPolymer Ridge, S. J., R. E. White, Y. Tsau, R. N. Beaver, and G. A. Eisman,
Electrolyte Fuel Cells,” J . Electrochem. SOC.,137, 3344 (1990). “Oxygen Reduction in a Proton Exchange Membrane Test Cell,”
Burshtein, R. Kh., A. V. Dribinskii, M. R. Tarasevich, Yu. A. Chiz J . Electrochem. SOC., 136, 1902 (1989).
madzhev, and Yu. G. Chirkov, “Mechanism of Current Generation Rieke, P. C., and N. E. Vanderborgh, “Thin Film Electrode Arrays
of WaterRepellent Gaseous Diffusion Electrodes: I.,” Soviet Elec for Mapping the CurrentVoltage Distributions in ProtonExchange
trochemistry, 7, 1762 (1971); translated from Elektrokhimiya, 7, Membrane Fuel Cells,” J. Electrochem. SOC.,134, 1099 (1987).
1826 (1971). Savinell, R. F., and S. D. Fritts, “Theoretical Performance of a Hy
Burshtein, R. Kh., A. V. Dribinskii, M. R. Tarasevich, Yu. A. Chiz drogenBromine Rechargeable SPE Fuel Cell,” J. Power Sources,
madzhev, and Yu. G. Chirkov, “Mechanism of Current Generation 22, 423 (1988).
in Hydrophobized Gas Diffusion Electrodes: 11. Dependence of the Schlogl, R., “Zur Theorie der Anomalen Osmose,” Z . Physik. Chem.,
Electrochemical Activity on the Hydrophobizing Agent in the Active 3, 73, Frankfurt, (1955).
Layer,” Soviet Electrochemistry, 8, 195 (1972); translated from Schlogl, R., “Membrane Permeation in Systems Far from Equilib
Elektrokhimiya, 8, 20 (1972). rium,” Ber Eunsenges. Physik. Chem., 70, 400 (1966).
Chirkov, Yu. G., “Difference Between Hydrophobized and Hydro Tiedemann, W., and J. Newman, “PorousElectrode Theory with
philic Electrodes: 111. Cylindrical Gas Pore Model,” Soviet Elec Battery Applications,” AIChE J . , 21, 25 (1975).
trochemistry, 11, 36 (1975a); translated from Elektrokhimiya, 11, Ticianelli, E. A., C. R. Derouin, A. Redondo, and S. Srinivasan,
43 (1975a). “Methods to Advance Technology of Proton Exchange Membrane
Chirkov, Yu. G., “Difference Between Hydrophobized and Hydro Fuel Cells,” J. Electrochem. Soc., 135, 2209 (1988a).
philic Electrodes: IV. Forming Physical and Mathematical Models,” Ticianelli, E. A., C. R. Derouin, and S. Srinivasan, “Localization of
Soviet Electrochemistry, 11, 41 (1975b); translated from Elektro Platinum in Low Catalyst Loading Electrodes to Attain High Power
khimiya, 11, 50 (1975b). Densities in SPE Fuel Cells,” J. Electroanal. Chem., 251, 275
Giordano, N., E. Passalacqua, V. Alderucci, P. Staiti, L. Pino, H. (1988b).
Mirzaian, E. J. Taylor, and G. Wilemski, “Morphological Char Van Winkle, J . , and W. N. Carson, Jr., “Optimization Calculations
acteristics of PTFE Bonded Gas Diffusion Electrodes,” Electro for Fuel Cell Systems,” Electrochem. Tech., 1, 18 (1963).
chim. Acta., 36, 1049 (1991). Verbrugge, M. W., and R. F. Hill, “Ion and Solvent Transport in
Fales, J. L., N. E. Vanderborgh, and P. Stroeve, “The Influence of IonExchange Membranes I. A Macrohomogeneous Mathematical
Channel Geometry on Ionic Transport ,” Diaphragms, Separators, Model,” J. Electrochem. Soc., 137, 886 (1990a).
and IonExchange Membranes, Vol. 8613, J. W. Van Zee, R. E. Verbrugge, M. W., and R. F. Hill, “Transport Phenomena in Per
White, K. Kinoshita, and H. S. Burney, eds., The Electrochemical fluorosulfonic Acid Membranes During the Passage of Current,”
Society, Pennington, NJ (1986). J. Electrochem. SOC.,137, 1131 (1990b).
Fritts, S. D., and R. F. Savinell, “Simulation Studies on the Per Watkins, D., K. Dircks, and D. Epp, “Canadian Solid Polymer Fuel
formance of the Hydrogen Electrode Bonded to Proton Exchange Cell Development,” Program and Abstracts from the Fuel Cell
Membranes in the HydrogenBromine Fuel Cell,” J. Power Sources, Seminar, Long Beach, CA (Oct., 1988).
28, 301 (1989). Weast, R. C., ed., Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, CRC Press,
Hirschfelder, J . O., C. F. Curtiss, and R. B. Bird, Molecular Theory 58th ed., Cleveland, OH, Section f (1977).
of Gases and Liquids, Chap. 11, Wiley, New York (1954). Yang, S. C., M. B. Cutlip, and P. Stonehart, “Further Development
Holze, R., and W. Vielstich, “The Kinetics of Oxygen Reduction at of an Approximate Model for Mass Transfer with Reaction in Po
Porous TeflonBonded Fuel Cell Electrodes,” J. Electrochem. Soc., rous GasDiffusion Electrodes to Include Substrate Effects,” Elec
131, 2298 (1984). trochim. Acta, 34, 703 (1989).
Janczuk, B., and T. Bialopiotrowicz, “Adhesion of Air Bubbles to
Teflon Surfaces in Water,” J. Colloid. Sci., 128, 1 (1989). Manuscript receiwd Dec. 26, 1990, and revision received June 17, 1991.
AIChE Journal August 1991 Vol. 37, No. 8 1163