A Comprehensive Review of Thermal Management in Solid Oxide Fuel Cells: Focus on Burners, Heat Exchangers, and Strategies

Li, Mingfei; Wang, Jingjing; Chen, Zhengpeng; Qian, Xiuyang; Sun, Chuanqi; Gan, Di; Xiong, Kai; Rao, Mumin; Chen, Chuangting; Li, Xi

doi:10.3390/en17051005

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 168 publications

(195 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The 2D optimization is used to check the ext which an optimization can also be transferred to three dimensions, as a 2D optimiz could be carried out much faster. For this purpose, the 2D optimization aims to im the heat transfer at a constant pressure loss and the resulting shape is then transfer These heat exchangers must be designed in such a way that low-pressure losses are achieved with high efficiency and a high degree of compactness, as stated in Li et al [12], for example, in SOFC systems. This means that the heat exchangers are only operated in the laminar flow range, as is often the case with compact heat exchangers [13].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shape Optimization of Heat Exchanger Fin Structures Using the Adjoint Method and Their Experimental Validation

Fuchs,

Dagli,

Kabelac

2024

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The freedom of additive manufacturing allows for the production of heat-transferring structures that are optimized in terms of heat transfer and pressure loss using various optimization methods. One question is whether the structural optimizations made can be reproduced by additive manufacturing and whether the adaptations can also be verified experimentally. In this article, adjoint optimization is used to optimize a reference structure and then examine the optimization results experimentally. For this purpose, optimizations are carried out on a 2D model as well as a 3D model. The material chosen for the 3D optimization is stainless steel. Depending on the weighting pairing of heat transfer and pressure loss, the optimizations in 2D result in an increase in heat transfer of 15% compared to the initial reference structure with an almost constant pressure loss or a reduction in pressure loss of 13% with an almost constant heat transfer. The optimizations in 3D result in improvements in the heat transfer of a maximum of 3.5% at constant pressure loss or 9% lower pressure losses at constant heat transfer compared to the initial reference structure. The subsequent experimental investigation shows that the theoretical improvements in heat transfer can only be demonstrated to a limited extent, as the fine contour changes cannot yet be reproduced by additive manufacturing. However, the improvements in pressure loss can be demonstrated experimentally following a cross-section correction. It can therefore be stated that with increasing accuracy of the manufacturing process, the improvements in heat transfer can also be utilized.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%