Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorKümük, Berre
dc.date.accessioned2025-03-18T06:32:33Z
dc.date.available2025-03-18T06:32:33Z
dc.date.issued2024en_US
dc.identifier.citationKumuk, B. (2024). Comprehensive modeling of solid oxide electrolyzer cells for H2O and CO2 co-electrolysis. International journal of energy studies (Online) , 9(3), 381 - 397. https://doi.org/10.58559/ijes.1531980en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.58559/ijes.1531980
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12508/3399
dc.description.abstractIn this study, a 2D model of Solid Oxide Electrolysis Cells (SOECs) was developed to evaluate their performance in CO2 and H2O co-electrolysis. The numerical results were rigorously validated against prior studies, demonstrating high consistency. The investigation focused on understanding the influence of various factors such as support type and operating temperature on SOEC performance.Analysis of polarization and performance curves revealed that anode-supported and cathode-supported SOECs exhibited similar characteristics, while electrolyte-supported SOECs displayed lower performance due to inadequate conductivity and increased electrolyte thickness. At 1.6 V, the average current density for cathode-supported SOEC was approximately 2.3679 A/cm², slightly lower than that of anode-supported SOEC, which was approximately 2.3879 A/cm². Moreover, at an average current density of around 5.30 A/cm², the cathode-supported SOEC yielded an average power density of 10 W/cm², while the anode-supported SOEC achieved 10.1 W/cm².Furthermore, increasing temperature was found to enhance SOEC performance by promoting more efficient chemical reactions, reducing resistance, and improving gas production rates during electrolysis of H2O and CO2. However, careful consideration of optimal operating temperatures is essential to ensure cell durability and material lifespan.Moreover, comparing co-flow and cross-flow configurations highlighted minor differences in performance, with co-flow demonstrating slightly lower average current density but comparable power density at 1.6 V. Co-flow configuration was favored for its homogeneous operation, facilitating efficient gas mixing and diffusion, while counter-flow configurations may introduce heterogeneity, potentially affecting overall performance.Overall, this study provides valuable insights into optimizing SOEC performance and efficiency, emphasizing the importance of support type, operating temperature, and flow configuration in achieving optimal performance for CO2 and H2O co-electrolysis applications.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherTESPAMen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.58559/ijes.1531980en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectNumerical modelingen_US
dc.subjectSolid oxide electrolyzeren_US
dc.subjectCO2 co-electrolysisen_US
dc.subjectH2O co-electrolysisen_US
dc.titleComprehensive modeling of solid oxide electrolyzer cells for H2O and CO2 co-electrolysisen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.relation.journalInternational journal of energy studies (Online)en_US
dc.contributor.departmentİskenderun Meslek Yüksekokulu -- Otomotiv Teknolojisi Bölümüen_US
dc.identifier.volume9en_US
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage381en_US
dc.identifier.endpage397en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Ulusal Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.contributor.isteauthorKümük, Berre
dc.relation.indexTR-Dizinen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Thumbnail

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster