Renewable Energy: Ali Volkan Akkaya, Bahri Sahin, Hasan Huseyin Erdem
Renewable Energy: Ali Volkan Akkaya, Bahri Sahin, Hasan Huseyin Erdem
Renewable Energy: Ali Volkan Akkaya, Bahri Sahin, Hasan Huseyin Erdem
Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: A tubular solid oxide fuel cell (TSOFC) module fed by methane is modelled and analyzed thermody-
Received 12 July 2007 namically from the exergy point of view in this paper. The model of TSOFC module consists of mixer, pre-
Accepted 17 November 2008 reformer, internal reforming fuel cell group, afterburner and internal pre-heater components. The model
Available online 21 December 2008
of the components forming module is given based on mass, energy and exergy balance equations. The
developed thermodynamic model is simulated, and the obtained performance characteristics are
Keywords:
compared and validated with the experimental data taken from the literature concerning TSOFC module.
Tubular SOFC
For exergetic performance analysis, the effects of operating variables such as current density, pressure,
Modelling
Simulation and fuel utilization factor on exergetic performances (module exergy efficiency, module exergetic
Exergetic performance performance coefficient, module exergy output and total exergy destruction rate, and components’
exergy efficiencies, exergy destruction rates) are investigated. From the analysis, it is determined that the
biggest exergy loss stems from exhaust gasses. Other important sources of exergy destruction involve
fuel cell group and afterburner. Consequently, the developed thermodynamic model is expected to
provide not only a convenient tool to determine the module exergetic performances and component
irreversibility but also an appropriate basis to design complex hybrid power generation plants.
Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
0960-1481/$ – see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2008.11.017
1864 A.V. Akkaya et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 1863–1870
where h denotes the specific molar enthalpy including formation where Dg is Gibbs energy change for related reactions, T3 is pre-
and sensible enthalpy. i refers to the species in the flow of each reformer outlet temperature assumed equal to the reaction
node of the system. temperature.
Exergy is considered as the sum of the physical and chemical Pre-reformer outlet temperature can be found from energy
exergy. For each node of the module, physical and chemical exergy balance equation given as:
can be defined as [13]: X X
n_ 2;i ,h2;i in n_ 3;i ,h3;i out ¼ 0 (11)
X
_ f ¼ i i
Ex n_ i hi ho;i To si so;i (4)
i Exergy destruction rate and exergy efficiency for the pre-
reformer can be written as following equations:
X X
_ c ¼
Ex n_ i xi ekim þ RTo xi lnðxi Þ (5)
i _ D;PR ¼ Ex
_ Ex
_
i i Ex 2 3 (12)
where Ex _ f and Ex
_ c represent the physical and chemical exergy, _
Ex
respectively. T is temperature, s is the specific molar entropy at hE;PR ¼ _ 3 (13)
Ex2
condition specified for the species, the subscript 0 is environment
conditions, R is universal gas constant, x is the molar fraction of the
gas i at the each node and ekim is standard chemical exergy taken 2.3. Fuel cell group
i
from literature [13].
The exergy destruction rate for the mixer can be expressed from Effluent gas mixture from pre-reformer contains mainly
exergy balance given as: methane, hydrogen, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and steam.
This gas mixture is reformed completely to hydrogen and carbon
_ D;M ¼ Ex
Ex _ þ Ex
_ Ex
_ (6) dioxide by the internal reforming reactions (Eq. (14a) and Eq.
1 6 2
(14b)). Simultaneously, hydrogen is used at the electrochemical
The exergy efficiency of mixer can be defined as following [14]. reaction (Eq. (14c)).
_
Ex CH4 D H2 O 4 CO D 3H2 ðreformingÞ (14a)
2
hE;M ¼ _ _
(7)
Ex1 þ Ex 6
CO D H2 O 4 CO2 D H2 ðshiftingÞ (14b)
2.2. Pre-reformer
H2 D 0:5O2 / H2 OðelectrochemicalÞ (14c)
In the pre-reformer, the thermal energy of the hot gas mixture
when x,_ y_ and z_ are taken into account as consumed molar flow
coming from the mixer is supposed to heat source for following
reactions: rates of methane, carbon monoxide and hydrogen, respectively, at
the fuel cell group, anode and cathode outlet gas flow rates can be
CH4 D H2 O 4 CO D 3H2 ðreformingÞ (8a) written from mass balance as below:
side. The variables x_ and y_ are calculated based on reaction equi- n_ 9;CO2 ¼ n_ 5;CO2 þ y_ ky (23b)
librium. Equilibrium constants of reforming and shifting reactions
(Kpr and Kps) can be written as:
n_ 9;H2 ¼ n_ 5;H2 z_ ky (23c)
n_
_ z_ 3
_ y
3;H2 þ3xþ n_ _ y_
þx
n_ 2;tot þ2x_
, n_3;CO þ2x_ n_ 9;H2 O ¼ n_ 5;H2 O þ z_ ky (23d)
P2
2;tot
Kpr ¼ n_ _
n_ _ yþ _ z_
(16a)
3;CH4 x 2;H2 O x
n_ þ2x_
, n_ þ2x_
2;tot 2;tot
n_ 9;O2 ¼ n_ 8;O2 0:5z_ ky 0:5y_ ky (23e)
n_ 3;H
þ3xþ _ z_
_ y
n_ _
2 3;CO þy
, n_ 2þ2x_
n_ 2;tot þ2x_ 2;tot n_ 9;N2 ¼ n_ 8;N2 (23f)
Kps ¼ _ n_ _ z_
_ yþ
(16b)
n3;CO þx _ y_ 3;H2 O x
n_ þ2x_
, n_ þ2x_ where the subscripts 5 and 8 represent the inlet of afterburner
2;tot 2;tot
_ _ _ _ _ _ (28)
Ex D;FC ¼ Ex3 þ Ex7 Ex4 Ex8 W FC (20)
Exergy destruction rate and exergy efficiency of internal pre-
Exergy efficiency of fuel cell group can be given as:
heater can be given as following equations:
_
W
FC _ D;PH ¼ Ex
Ex _ þ Ex
_ _ _
hE;FC ¼ _ (21) 9 11 Ex7 Ex10 (29)
_ 7 Þ ðEx
ðEx3 þ Ex _ þ Ex
_ Þ
4 8
Table 1
2.4. Afterburner
Simulation input parameters.
Non-recirculated anodic gas stream and unused cathodic air Parameter Value
flow stream from SOFC group are combined and burned at after- Fuel composition (%) 100 CH4
Cell operating temperature ( C) 1000
burner. Combustion reactions occurred at the afterburner are given
Module operating pressure (bar) 1.08
as below: Average current density (A/m2) 1800
Cell active area (m2) 0.0834
H2 D 0:5O2 / H2 OðHydrogen combustionÞ (22a) Tubular cell number 1152
Air inlet temperature ( C) 630
Fuel inlet temperature ( C) 400
CO D 0:5O2 / CO2 ðCarbonmonoxide combustionÞ (22b) Afterburner efficiency (%) 98
Cell fuel utilization factor (%) 67.7
when z_ ky and y_ ky are taken into consideration as consumed
Total fuel utilization factor (%) 85
hydrogen and carbon monoxide flow rates respectively, afterburner Air utilization factor (%) 18
exit gas composition can be written based on molar mass balance Molar steam/carbon ratio (–) 2
Pressure loss in fuel cell group (%) 2
equations given as following:
Pressure loss in afterburner (%) 3
n_ 9;CO ¼ n_ 5;CO y_ ky (23a) Inverter efficiency (%) 92.5
A.V. Akkaya et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 1863–1870 1867
Table 2 Table 3
Comparison of model results with literature. Exergy efficiency and exergy destruction of TSOFC module and its components.
Parameter Literature [6,10,16,26] Simulation Components Exergy efficiency (%) Exergy destruction rate (kW)
Cell voltage (V) 0.682 0.678 Mixer 99.29 2.30
Gross DC power (kW) 118 117.2 Pre-reforming 99.58 1.35
Pre-reformer outlet temperature ( C) 550 550.5 Fuel cell group 81.99 23.80
Module exhaust gas temperature ( C) 847 846.5 Afterburner 94.35 13.36
Gross DC electrical efficiency (%) 53.25 55.4 Pre-heater 91.72 4.10
Gross AC electrical efficiency (%) 50 51.3
Module 48.78 44.91
Ex _
_ Ex Exergetic performance coefficient is defined as:
hE;PH ¼ _ 7 _ 11 (30)
Ex9 Ex10 _ tot
Ex
EPC ¼ (34)
_ D;Tot
Ex
2.6. Exergetic performance indices of TSOFC module
This criterion was introduced by Ust [22] and was applied to
Total exergy rate is equal to electrical power output of TSOFC different power generation systems using the approach of finite
module: time thermodynamics [23–25]. An analysis of power generation
systems based on this criterion will be beneficial for engineering
_ tot ¼ W
Ex _ (31)
FC decisions in terms of better performance and ecology.
Exergy efficiency of the tubular SOFC module can be written as:
3. Results and discussion
_ tot
Ex
hE ¼ (32) A simulator of the TSOFC module is written in a computer
n_ f ekim
f
program using the equations of the TSOFC module components
Total exergy destruction rate is sum of the destruction rate of all given in Section 2. The major characteristics of performance are
components given as follows: computed by means of this simulator. Table 1 shows the input
parameters relevant to simulation of the developed model based on
100 kW tubular SOFC module. The simulation results are compared
_ D;Tot ¼ Ex
Ex _ D;M þ Ex
_ D;PR þ Ex
_ _ _ _
D;FC þ ExD;AB þ ExD;PH þ Eexh (33) to the main characteristics concerning the TSOFC module
Fig. 2. Effect of operating pressure (P) on exergetic performances; a) module exergy efficiency (hE) and module exergetic performance coefficient (EPC), b) module total exergy
_
output ðEx _
SOFC Þ and module total exergy destruction rate ðExD;tot Þ, c) exergy efficiencies of components (PR – pre-reformer, M – mixer, AB – afterburner, pH – pre-heater, FC – fuel
cell group), d) exergy destruction rates of components.
1868 A.V. Akkaya et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 1863–1870
developed by SWPC. As seen from Table 2, this comparison shows this context, increasing total exergy destruction rate more than
that the developed model of the tubular SOFC module can repre- total exergy output makes clear the reason of the decline trend of
sent accurately its performance. Table 3 shows the exergy efficiency the ECP. The variations of component exergy efficiencies and their
and exergy destruction rate of TSOFC module and its components exergy destruction rates with respect to operating pressure are
for nominal simulation input parameters given in Table 1. It can be shown in Fig. 2c and d. From observation of these figures one can
deduced from Table 3 that exergy efficiency of fuel cell group is the see that there is no considerably influence of operating pressure
smallest of all components and its exergy destruction rate is the alteration on component exergy efficiency and their exergy
biggest. This result is expected, as the major irreversibility sources destruction rates except fuel cell group. Furthermore, it is under-
such as chemical and electrochemical reactions takes place inside stood that the biggest exergy loss is caused by exhaust gas flow, and
the fuel cell group. It can be concluded from the result that a special increasing pressure makes the exergy loss to increase considerably.
attention must be given to fuel cell group in terms of exergetic This is because air flow rate increases in order to meet given
performance improvement. As well as fuel cell group, another constant exhaust temperature (847 C) when operating pressure
important sources of exergy destruction in the TSOFC module is goes up.
afterburner that the site of combustion reactions. The variations of the exergetic performance with respect to
The effects of operating pressure (P), current density (j) and fuel current density are summarized in the plots presented in Fig. 3a–d.
utilization factor (Uf) on exergetic performances of the tubular It can be seen from Fig. 3a that exergy efficiency and exergetic
SOFC module are also investigated and the obtained results are performance coefficient (EPC) reduces when current density
given in Figs. 2–4. In this sensitivity analysis, module exhaust increases. It can be noted that when current density value
temperature is taken as a constant parameter (847 C), therefore air approaches the limiting current density (6500 A/m2), the module
flow rate entering module is iteratively determined by changing air exergy efficiency and exergetic performance coefficient drop
utilization factor. rapidly to zero due to growing voltage losses quickly. The variations
The variations of exergetic performances for the tubular SOFC of exergy output and total exergy destruction rate of the module
module with respect to operating pressure are investigated, and the with respect to current density are illustrated in Fig. 3b. As current
results are given in Fig. 2. We see from Fig. 2a that increasing density increases, exergy output increases firstly and has
pressure results in exergy efficiency (hE) increase while it causes to a maximum value (190 kW) at 5000 A/m2 value of current density,
decrease the exergetic performance coefficient (EPC). The effect of after maximum condition, the value of exergy output reduces
the operating pressure on the total exergy output ðEx _
SOFC Þ and total instantly and becomes zero at limiting current density. The module
exergy destruction rate ðEx _ D;tot Þ is shown in Fig. 2b. It can be exergy output (equal to power output) increases until the current
observed from this figure that both exergy output and total exergy density value of 5000 A/m2 owing to the fact that power
destruction rate increase when operating pressure is elevated. In augmentation effect of current density dominates the effects of
Fig. 3. Effect of current density (j) on exergetic performances; a) module exergy efficiency (hE) and module exergetic performance coefficient (EPC), b) module total exergy output
_
ðEx _
SOFC Þ and module total exergy destruction rate ðExD;tot Þ, c) exergy efficiencies of components (PR – pre-reformer, M – mixer, AB – afterburner, pH – pre-heater, FC – fuel cell
group), d) exergy destruction rates of components.
A.V. Akkaya et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 1863–1870 1869
Fig. 4. Effect of fuel utilization factor (Uf) on exergetic performances; a) module exergy efficiency (hE) and module exergetic performance coefficient (EPC), b) module total exergy
_
output ðEx _
SOFC Þ and module total exergy destruction rate ðExD;tot Þ, c) exergy efficiencies of components (PR – pre-reformer, M – mixer, AB – afterburner, pH – pre-heater, FC – fuel
cell group), d) exergy destruction rates of components.
voltage losses. After maximum exergy output conditions, the factor and passes a minimum value, after that increases rapidly. The
exergy output reduces because of the fact that voltage loss effects of value of fuel utilization factor minimizing the total exergy
current density become more dominant. It is also seen from Fig. 3a– destruction rate is about 0.88. The variations of exergy efficiencies
b that exergy efficiency and EPC values at maximum exergy output and exergy destruction for the module components with respect to
condition are 32% and 0.22, respectively. From these results, it can fuel utilization factor are depicted in Fig. 4c and d. It can be seen
be said that current density should be lower than 5000 A/m2 in from Fig. 4c that exergy efficiency of afterburner increases while
terms of exergetic performance. The variations of component exergy efficiency of fuel cell group decreases with increasing fuel
exergy efficiencies and exergy destruction rates with respect to utilization factor. It can be noted that other components’ exergy
current density are exemplified in Fig. 3c–d. From Fig. 3c, it can be efficiencies are not affected significantly by change of fuel utiliza-
observed that although increasing current density results in tion factor. We can observe from Fig. 4d that exergy destruction rate
a reduction of fuel cell group’s exergy efficiency, the variations in of fuel cell group increases, whereas exergy destruction rate
current density have no significant effects on exergy efficiencies of afterburner decreases with increasing fuel utilization factor. The
other components. We can observe from Fig. 3d that exergy main reason is that increasing fuel utilization factor reduces cell
destruction rates of all components increases with current density voltage, thus exergy destruction of fuel cell group increases. On the
increase. It is also seen that the most exergy loss is arisen from the other side, increasing fuel utilization factor causes lower hydrogen
exhaust gases with the increasing current density. amount in the afterburner, therefore destruction of afterburner
The effects of fuel utilization factor on the exergetic perfor- increases. As seen also from this figure that the biggest exergy
mances of tubular SOFC module are examined and the results are losses result from the exhaust gasses, and this exergy loss passes
given in Fig. 4. It can be clearly seen from Fig. 4a that exergy effi- a minimum at 0.88 value of fuel utilization factor.
ciency and exergetic performance coefficient of TSOFC module have
maximum values (hE ¼ 48%, EPC ¼ 0.50) at the same fuel utilization 4. Conclusion
factor (Uf ¼ 0.79). The variations of module exergy output and total
exergy destruction rate in terms of fuel utilization factor are shown In this study, a tubular SOFC module fed by methane has been
in Fig. 4b. As seen from this figure, total exergy output decreases modelled thermodynamically. The presented comparative simu-
with the increasing fuel utilization factor. It should be noted that lation results indicate that the developed model for tubular SOFC
the decrease in higher fuel utilization factor is more rapid. The module is an effective simulator. An exergetic performance anal-
reason is that increasing fuel utilization factor results in a reduction ysis based on the developed thermodynamic model has been
of fuel flow rate entering module and an increase of voltage losses carried out. All considered exergetic performances for the TSOFC
due to polarizations. We can also see from Fig. 4b that total exergy module are investigated in a very wide range of operation
destruction rate reduces up to a certain value of fuel utilization parameter such as effects of pressure, current density and fuel
1870 A.V. Akkaya et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 1863–1870
utilization factor. It can be concluded from the results of the [10] Zang W, Croiset E, Douglas PL, Fowler MW, Entchev E. Simulation of a tubular
solid oxide fuel cell stack using AspenPlusÔ unit operation models. Energy
analysis that most of the exergy entering the TSOFC module is
Conversion and Management 2005;46:181–96.
converted to the product electricity and rejected from module as [11] Yaofan Y, Rao AD, Brouwer J, Samuelsen GS. Fuel flexibility study of an integrated
heat of exhaust gasses. A relatively smaller quantity is lost within 25 kW SOFC reformer system. Journal of Power Sources 2005;144:67–76.
module components. Among the components, the most important [12] Cali M, Santarelli MGL, Leone P. Computer experimental analysis of the CHP
performance of a 100 kWe SOFC field unit by a factorial design. Journal of
exergy destruction rates are associated with fuel cell group and Power Sources 2006;156(2):400–13.
afterburner, respectively. Note that the heat rejected from the [13] Kotas TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. Malabar, USA: Krieger
module has significant exergy amount due to high exhaust Publishing Company; 1995.
[14] Bejan A, Tsatsaronis G, Moran M. Thermal design and optimization. New York:
temperature, and can be therefore beneficial for cogeneration or Wiley; 1995.
hybrid application. As a future study, this developed model of the [15] Dincer I, Rosen MA. Exergy as a driver for achieving sustainability. Interna-
SOFC module can be integrated to hybrid system for exergy and tional Journal of Green Energy 2004;1:1–19.
[16] George RA. Status of tubular SOFC field unit demonstrations. Journal of Power
exergoeconomic analysis. As a result, the developed model may Sources 2000;186:134–9.
provide a basis for determination the optimal design and oper- [17] Song TW, Sohn JL, Kim JH, Kim TS, Ro ST, Suzuki K. Performance analysis of
ating conditions in terms of exergetic methodology for SOFC based a tubular solid oxide fuel cell/micro gas turbine hybrid power system based on
a quasi-two dimensional model. Journal of Power Sources 2005;142:30–42.
systems. [18] Akkaya AV. Electrochemical model for performance analysis of a tubular SOFC.
International Journal of Energy Research 2007;31:79–98.
[19] Akkaya AV, Sahin B, Erdem HH. Exergetic performance analysis of a simple fuel
References cell system. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2007;32(17):4600–9.
[20] EG&G Services Parsons Inc. Fuel cell handbook. 6th ed. West Virginia: Science
[1] Larminie J, Dicks A. Fuel cell system explained. New York: Wiley & Sons Ltd; Applications Int. Corp. US Department of Energy, National Energy Technology
2004. Laboratory; 2002.
[2] Singhal SC, Kendal K. High temperature solid oxide fuel cells: fundamental, [21] Williams MC, Strakey JP, Singhal SC. U.S. distributed generation fuel cell
design and applications. UK: Elsevier; 2004. program. Journal of Power Sources 2004;131:79–85.
[3] Singhal SC. Advances in solid oxide fuel cell technology. Solid State Ionics [22] Ust Y. Ecological performance analysis and optimization of power generation
2000;135:305–13. systems, PhD thesis. Turkey: Yildiz Technical University; 2005.
[4] Bessette NF, Wepfer WJ. A mathematical model of a tubular solid oxide fuel [23] Ust Y, Sahin B, Sogut OS. Performance analysis and optimization of an irre-
cell. Journal of Energy Research Technology 1995;117:43–9. versible dual cycle based on ecological coefficient of performance criterion.
[5] Bessette NF, Wepfer WJ. Prediction on-design and off-design performance of Applied Energy 2005;82:23–39.
a solid oxide fuel cell power module. Energy Conversion and Management [24] Ust Y, Sahin B, Kodal A, Akcay IH. Ecological coefficient of performance anal-
1996;37(3):281–93. ysis and optimization of an irreversible regenerative-Brayton heat engine.
[6] Campanari S. Thermodynamic model and parametric analysis of a tubular Applied Energy 2006;83(6):558–72.
SOFC module. Journal of Power Sources 2001;92:26–34. [25] Ust Y, Sahin B, Kodal A. Performance analysis of an irreversible Brayton heat
[7] Pangalis MG, Martinez-Botas RF, Brandon NP. Integration of solid oxide fuel engine based on ecological coefficient of performance criterion. International
cell into gas turbine power generation cycles. Part 1: fuel cell thermodynamic Journal of Thermal Sciences 2006;45(1):94–101.
modelling. Proceeding of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A [26] Cali M, Santarelli MGL, Leone P. Design of experiments for fitting regression
Journal of Power and Energy 2002;216(2):129–44. models on the tubular KOFC CHP 100 kWe: screening test, response surface
[8] Lazzaretto A, Toffolo A, Zanon F. Parameter setting for a tubular SOFC simu- analysis and optimization. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy
lation model. Transaction of ASME. Journal of Energy Resources Technology 2007;32:343–58.
2004;126:40–6. [27] Akkaya AV. Performance analysis of solid oxide fuel cell based energy gener-
[9] Lemanski M, Badur J. Parametrical analysis of a tubular pressurized SOFC. ation systems with alternative criteria, PhD thesis. Turkey: Yildiz Technical
Archives of Thermodynamics 2004;25:53–72. University; 2007.