A Modular Fuel Cell, Modular DCDC Converter Concept for High Performance and Enhanced Reliability

ABSTRACT

Fuel cell stacks produce a dc output with a 2:1 variation in output voltage from no-load to full-load. The output voltage of each fuel cell is about 0.4 V at full-load, and several of them are connected in series to construct a stack. An example 100 V fuel cell stack consists of 250 cells in series and to produce 300 V at full load requires 750 cells stacked in series. Since fuel cells actively convert the supplied fuel to electricity, each cell requires proper distribution of fuel, humidification, coupled with water/thermal management needs. With this added complexity, stacking more cells in series decreases the reliability of the system. For example, in the presence of bad or mal performing cell/cells in a stack, uneven heating coupled with variations in cell voltages may occur. Continuous operation under these conditions may not be possible or the overall stack output power is severely limited. In this paper, a modular fuel cell powered by a modular dcdc converter is proposed. The proposed concept electrically divides the fuel cell stack into various sections, each powered by a dcdc converter. The proposed modular fuel cell powered by modular dcdc converter eliminates many of these disadvantages, resulting in a fault tolerant system. A design example is presented for a 150-W, three-section fuel cell stack and dcdc converter topology. Experimental results obtained on a 150-W, three-section proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell stack powered by a modular dcdc converter are discussed.

INTRODUCTION

FUEL CELLS are electrochemical devices that process H2 and oxygen to generate electric power, having water vapor as their only by-product. The voltage resulting from the reaction of the fuel and oxygen varies with the load, and ranges from 0.8 V at no-load to about 0.4 V for

full-load. Due to their low output voltage, it becomes necessary to stack many cells in series to realize a practical system. For low-power applications, the number of cells that needs to be connected in series is small, but as power increases, the number of cells that are required in the stack increases rapidly [1], [2]. An example 100 V fuel cell stack consists of 250 cells in series and to produce 300 V at full-load requires 750 cells stacked in series. A conventional fuel cell system (Fig. 1) consists of a stack of cells and a dcdc converter to step-up its terminal voltage and compensate for its no-load to full-load variation [3][5]. Since this fuel cell structure is equivalent to connecting several voltage sources in series, each with its own internal impedance [6], [7], the output power of the stack is limited by the state of the weakest cell. The state of a cell can be inferred from the voltage across its terminals, which is affected by parameters such as fuel and air pressure, and membrane humidity. Furthermore, if a stack contains malfunctioning or defective cells, the whole system has to be taken out of service until major repairs are done. In order to circumvent these problems, a modular fuel cell powered by a modular dcdc converter (Fig. 2) is proposed in this paper. The proposed modular concept electrically divides the fuel cell stack into various sections, each powered by a dc dc converter. This modular fuel cell powered by modular dcdc converter eliminates many of the disadvantages, resulting in a fault tolerant system. A design example is presented for a 150-W, three-section fuel cell stack and dcdc converter topology. Experimental results obtained on a 150-W, three-section proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell stack powered by a modular dcdc converter are discussed.

Fig. 1 Utility scale fuel cell stack and dcdc/dcac converter

Fig. 2 Proposed modular fuel cell and modular dcdc converter concept The proposed system has the following advantages.

1) The power generated by different sections in the modular fuel cell stack can be independently controlled by each dcdc converter. 2) Extra heating in underperforming sections of the stack, due to their larger internal impedance, can be reduced by limiting their load current, thus reducing the internal losses in the fuel cell. 3) If a section of the stack is faulty, the dcdc converter controlling the faulty section can be disenabled and/or bypassed, while the rest of the system can continue operation at reduced power.

4) If the proposed modular stack is employed in automotive systems, under faults, the driver can steer the vehicle to a safe location at reduced power, since faulty stack sections can be shut down. Different modular topologies have been explored in the past for application on photovoltaic (PV) systems aimed mainly to reduce the need of having long strings of panels [8].However, for the case of fuel cell systems, due to their physical construction; long stacks of cells are not avoidable. Instead, the main concern is overheating and loss of output power due to the presence of bad cells in the stack. Thus, a different converter structure, control scheme, and modified stack structure become necessary.

WHAT IS A FUEL CELL?

A fuel cell by definition is an electrical cell, which unlike storage cells can be continuously fed with a fuel so that the electrical power output is sustained indefinitely (Connihan, 1981). They convert hydrogen, or hydrogen-containing fuels, directly into electrical energy plus heat through the electrochemical reaction of hydrogen and oxygen into water. The process is that of electrolysis in reverse.

Because hydrogen and oxygen gases are electrochemically converted into water, fuel cells have many advantages over heat engines. These include: high efficiency, virtually silent operation and, if hydrogen is the fuel, there are no pollutant emissions. If the hydrogen is produced from renewable energy sources, then the electrical power produced can be truly sustainable. The two principle reactions in the burning of any hydrocarbon fuel are the formation of water and carbon dioxide. As the hydrogen content in a fuel increases, the formation of water becomes more significant, resulting in proportionally lower emissions of carbon dioxide (Fig. 1). As fuel use has developed through time, the percentage of hydrogen content in the fuels has increased. It seems a natural progression that the fuel of the future will be 100% hydrogen.

Figure 1. Trends in the use of fuels. As fuel use has developed through time, the percentage of hydrogen content in the fuel has increased

HISTORY OF FUEL CELLS 2.1 The Gas Battery

Sir William Grove (1811-96), a British lawyer and amateur scientist developed the first fuel cell in 1839. The principle was discovered by accident during an electrolysis experiment. When Sir William disconnected the battery from the electrolyzer and connected the two electrodes together, he observed a current flowing in the opposite direction, consuming the gases of hydrogen and oxygen (Fig. 2). He called this device a gas battery. His gas battery consisted of platinum electrodes placed in test tubes of hydrogen and oxygen, immersed in a bath of dilute sulphuric acid. It generated voltages

Figure 2. The principle of an electrolyzer, shown left; of a fuel cell, shown right. (Larminie, 2000).

of about one volt. In 1842 Grove connected a number of gas batteries together in series to form a gas chain. He used the electricity produced from the gas chain to power an electrolyzer, splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen (Fig. 3). However, due to problems of corrosion of the electrodes and instability of the materials, Groves fuel cell was not practical. As a result, there was little research and further development of fuel cells for many years to follow.

Figure 3. Groves gas battery (1839) produced a voltage of about 1 volt, shown left. Groves gas chain powering an electrolyzer (1842), shown right. (Photo courtesy of Berry, 2000)

The Bacon fuel cell

Significant work on fuel cells began again in the 1930s, by Francis Bacon, a chemical engineer at Cambridge University, England. In the 1950s Bacon successfully produced the first practical fuel cell, which was an alkaline version (Fig. 4). It used an alkaline electrolyte (molten KOH) instead of dilute sulphuric acid. The electrodes were constructed of porous sintered nickel powder so that the gases could diffuse through the electrodes to be in contact with the aqueous electrolyte on the other side of the electrode. This greatly increased the contact area contact between the electrodes, the gases and the electrolyte, thus increasing the power density of the fuel cell. In addition, the use of nickel was much less expensive than that of platinum. Alkaline fuel cell:

Anode reaction: 2 H2 + 4 OHCathode reaction: O2 + 4 e-

- (Eq. 2.1) - (Eq. 2.2)

Bacons laboratory, at the Department of Chemical Engineering, Cambridge University (1955) A fuel cell stack can be seen being assembled on the left of the photograph (Photo courtesy of Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Cambridge).

Fuel cells for NASA

For space applications, fuel cells have the advantage over conventional batteries, in that they produce several times as much energy per equivalent unit of weight. In the1960s, International Fuel Cells in Windsor Connecticut developed a fuel cell power plant for the Apollo spacecraft. The plant, located in the service module of the spacecraft, provided both electricity as well as drinking water for the astronauts on their journey to the moon. It could supply 1.5 kilowatts of continuous electrical power. Fuel cell performance during the Apollo missions was exemplary. Over 10,000 hours of operation were accumulated in 18 missions, without a single in-flight incident (IFC). In the 1970s, International Fuel Cells developed a more powerful alkaline fuel cell for NASAs Space Shuttle Orbiter (Fig. 5). The Orbiter uses three fuel cell power plants to supply all of the electrical needs during flight. There are no backup batteries on the space

NASA Space Shuttle Orbiter fuel cell. One of three fuel cells aboard the Space Shuttle. These fuel cells provide all of the electricity as well as drinking water when Space Shuttle is in flight. It produces 12 kilowatts electricity, and occupies 154 litres.

shuttle, and as such, the fuel cell power plants must be highly reliable. The power plants are fuelled by hydrogen and oxygen from cryogenic tanks and provide both electrical power and drinking water. Each fuel cell is capable of supplying 12 kilowatts continuously, and up to 16 kilowatts for short periods. The Orbiter units represent a significant technology advance over Apollo, producing about ten times the power from a similar sized package. In the Shuttle program, the fuel cells have demonstrated outstanding reliability (over 99% availability). To date, they have flown on 106 missions and clocked up over 82,000 hours of operation (NASA).

Alkaline fuel cells for terrestrial applications

Compared with other types of fuel cells, the alkaline variety offered the advantage of a high power to weight ratio. This was primarily due to intrinsically faster kinetics for oxygen reduction to the hydroxyl anion in an alkaline environment. Therefore alkaline fuel cells were ideal for space applications. However, for terrestrial use, the primary disadvantage of these cells is that of carbon dioxide poisoning of the electrolyte. Carbon dioxide is not only present in the air but also present in reformate gas, the hydrogen rich gas produced from the reformation of hydrocarbon fuels. In the poisoning of an alkaline fuel cell, the carbon dioxide reacts with the hydroxide ion in the electrolyte to form a carbonate, thereby reducing the hydroxide ion concentration in the electrolyte. This reduces the overall efficiency of the fuel cell. The equation of carbon dioxide reacting with a potassium hydroxide electrolyte is shown below: 2 KOH + CO2 K2CO3 + H2O (Eq. 2.4) Because of the complexity of isolating carbon dioxide from the alkaline electrolyte in fuel cells for terrestrial applications, most fuel cell developers have focused their attention on developing new types using electrolytes which are non-alkaline. These fuel cells include: solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC), phosphoric acid fuel cells (PAFC), molten carbonate fuel cells (MCFC) and polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cells.

The PEM fuel cell

In the early 1960s, General Electric (GE) also made a significant breakthrough in fuel cell technology. Through the work of Thomas Grubb and Leonard Niedrach, they invented and developed the first polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cell. It was initially developed under a program with the US Navys Bureau of Ships and U.S. Army Signal Corps to supply portable power for personnel in the field. Attracted by the possibility of using GEs PEM fuel cell on the Apollo missions, NASA tested its potential to provide auxiliary power onboard its Gemini spacecraft. The Gemini space program consisted of 12 flights in preparation for the Apollo missions to the moon. For lunar flights, a longer power source was required than could be provided by batteries, which had been used on previous space flights. Unfortunately, the GE fuel cell, model PB2, encountered technical difficulties prior to launch, including the leakage of oxygen through the membrane. As a result the Gemini missions 1 to 4 flew on batteries instead. The GE fuel cell was redesigned and a new model, the P3, successfully operated on the Gemini flights 6 to 12. The Gemini fuel cell power plant consisted of two fuel cell battery sections, each capable of producing a maximum power of about 1000 watts (NASA).

2.5.1 Ballard Power

A further limitation of the GE PEM fuel cell at that time was the large quantity of platinum required as a catalyst on the electrodes. The cost of PEM fuel cells was prohibitively high, restricting its use to space applications. In 1983, Geoffrey Ballard a Canadian geophysicist, chemist Keith Prater and engineer Paul Howard established the company, Ballard Power. Ballard took the abandoned GE fuel cell, whose patents were running out and searched for ways to improve its power and build it out of cheaper materials (Koppel, 1999). Working on a contract from the Canadian Department of National Defence, Ballard developed fuel cells with a significant increase in power density while reducing the amount of platinum required. From these developments it was recognized that fuel cells could be made smaller, more powerful and cheaply enough to eventually replace conventional power technologies. Ballard Power has since grown to become recognized as a world leader in PEM fuel cell technology, developing fuel cells

with power outputs ranging from 1 kilowatt, for portable and residential applications, through to 250 kilowatts for distributed power. Ballard has formed alliances with a wide range of companies, including DaimlerChrysler, Ford, Coleman and Ebara Power in Japan.

Los Alamos National Laboratory

In the late 1980s and early 1990s Los Alamos National Laboratory and Texas A&M University also made significant developments to the PEM fuel cell. They also found ways to significantly reduce the amount of platinum required and developed a method to limit catalyst poisoning due to the presence of trace impurities in the hydrogen fuel (Los Alamos National Laboratory).

3. FUEL CELL APPLICATIONS

3.1 Transportation

The California Low Emission Vehicle Program, administered by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), has been a large incentive for automobile manufacturers to actively pursue fuel cell development. This program requires that beginning in 2003, ten percent of passenger cars delivered for sale in California from medium or large sized manufacturers must be Zero Emission Vehicles, called ZEVs. Automobiles powered by fuel cells meet these requirements, as the only output of a hydrogen fuel cell is pure water. The NECAR 5 (Fig. 6) is the latest prototype fuel cell automobile by DaimlerChrysler. This automobile is fuelled with liquid methanol which is converted into hydrogen and carbon dioxide through use of an onboard fuel processor. The vehicle has virtually no pollutant emissions of sulphur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide or particulates, the primary pollutants of the internal combustion engine. The efficiency of a fuel cell engine is about a factor of two higher than that of an internal combustion engine and the output of carbon dioxide is considerably lower. The NECAR 5 drives and feels like a normal car. It has a top speed of over 150 km/hr (90 mph), with a power output of 75 kW (100 horsepower). It is also believed that this vehicle will require less maintenance. It combines the low emission levels, the quietness and the smoothness

associated with electric vehicles, while delivering a performance similar to that of an automobile with an internal combustion engine. In April 1999 the California Fuel Cell Partnership was developed. Founding members included DaimlerChrysler, the California Air Resources Board, the California Energy Commission, Ballard Power, Ford, Shell and Texaco. The primary objective was to help commercialize fuel cell technology for vehicles through joint demonstration programs by the partners. Since then new participants have included General Motors, Honda, Hyundai, Nissan, Toyota, Volkswagen, British Petroleum, Exxon Mobil, Xcellsis, US Department of Energy and US Department of Transportation. To date seven of the worlds ten leading auto manufacturers have announced that they plan to introduce fuel cell automobiles beginning in the 2003 to 2005 timeframe. There are also plans for buses, trucks and trains all powered with fuel cell engines. In 2000, Ballard completed a two-year program testing six fuel cell buses, three in Vancouver, British Columbia and three in Chicago. The design and maintenance requirements of fuel-cell vehicles as well as public acceptance were included in the study. The results of the tests were exemplary. Thirty new buses powered by Ballards fuel cell will be introduced to 10 European cities beginning in 2002 for additional field testing. The resulting data will be used to further develop a commercial fuel cell bus

Distributed power generation

Electrical energy demands throughout the world are continuing to increase. In Canada the demand is growing at an annual rate of approximately 2.6%. In America the rate is about 2.4% (IEA., 1997), and in developing countries it is approximately 6% (Khatib., 1998). How can these energy demands be met responsibly and safely? Distributed power plants using fuel cells can provide part of the solution. Distributed or decentralized power plants, contrasted with centralized power plants, are plants located close to the consumer, with the capability of providing both heat and electrical power ( a combination known as cogeneration). Heat, the by-product of electrical power generation, is transferred from the fuel cell to a heat exchanger. The exchanger transfers the heat to a water supply, providing hot water to local customers. The overall efficiency of a cogeneration system can be in excess of 80 percent, comparatively high compared to a system producing electricity alone. An increase in efficiency naturally

corresponds to a decrease in fuel consumption. Distributed power plants have many additional advantages. For example, they can provide power to a remote location without the need of transporting electricity through transmission lines from a central plant. There is also an efficiency benefit in that the cost of transporting fuel is more than offset by the elimination of the electrical losses of transmission. The ability to quickly build up a power infrastructure in developing nations is often cited. Using fuel cell power plants obviates the need for an electrical grid.

Grid-connect applications

Distributed power plants can provide either primary or back-up power. In primary applications they can provide base-load power, operating virtually continuously from the consumption of natural gas, reducing the demand from the electrical grid. This not only decreases the cost of displaced power, but can also result in a reduction of demand charges imposed by the utility. Should the power plant provide an excess of electricity, the excess can be fed back into the electrical grid, resulting in additional savings. In case of a power outage on the grid, a distributed power plant can continue to provide power to essential services; eliminating the need for both an uninterruptible power supply (UPS), presently handled by lead-acid battery banks, and a stand-by generator, for extended periods of power outage. An additional quality of a fuel cell power plant for UPS applications is that the average down time is anticipated to be low, 3.2 to 32 seconds per year versus typically nine hours for a conventional battery-bank UPS (HDR Engineering). For industries where UPS systems are critical, such as banking, minimizing down time is of up most importance.

Non-grid connect applications

Other applications for fuel cell distributed power plants are also possible e.g. stand-alone back-up power generators. The fuel cell plant can be started in seconds, supplying power for as long as required from stored hydrogen, producing electrical power cleanly and virtually silently. Shown in Figure 7 is a prototype fuel cell distributed power plant, by Ballard Power. This unit provides 250 kilowatts of electricity and an equivalent amount of heat. This is enough power for

a community of about 50 homes, or a small hospital or a remote school. This particular unit incorporates a fuel processor so that natural gas can be used as a fuel. The fuel processor converts the natural gas, through the process of reformation, into a hydrogen-rich gas composed primarily of hydrogen and carbon dioxide. The hydrogen is used by the fuel cell and the carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere Eventually as an infrastructure for hydrogen develops, these units could be powered with hydrogen directly without the need of a fuel processor. Ballard Power is presently field testing five of these units in the United States, Germany, Japan and Switzerland, with four more units planned for 2002. Testing is expected to continue until 2004 after which commercial introduction is planned (Ballard Power).

Residential Power

Fuel cell power plants are also being developed by several manufacturers to provide electricity and heat to single-family homes. Fuelled by either natural gas or propane, these plants will be able to supply base-load power or all of the electricity required by a modern-day home. Ballard Power has developed a one-kilowatt fuel cell designed to supply both base-load electrical power as well as heat to a dwelling. This unit can also be fuelled by natural gas. It does not provide enough power to supply the total electrical demands of a residence, but it does shift a portion of the demand from the electrical grid to natural gas. The electrical efficiency of this fuel cell system is rated at 42% and the heat efficiency is rated at 43%. Therefore the combined cogeneration efficiency of the system can be as high as 85%. This particular generator is targeted at the Japanese residential market. Ballards goal is to commence sales of these units in 2004. Plug Power, based in Latham, New York has developed a new fuel cell power plant that supplies seven kilowatts of electrical power to the home plus heat, using either natural gas or propane as the fuel (Fig. 8). This is enough power to supply the electrical needs of a modern energy efficient house. At present, these units are designed to be used in parallel with the grid. This means the fuel cell will supply base-load power and the utility grid will handle momentary power surges. Should the electric grid fail, the fuel cell operates as a back-up generator providing power for the homes critical requirements. Second generation products will be designed to run independent of the grid. During 2000, Plug Power installed and tested 52 systems in the field and accumulated

over 133,000 hours of system run-time. General Electric which is marketing Plug Powers unit, has announced that commercial introduction of this home fuel cell power plant is expected in 2002 (Plug Power)

Portable Power

Several manufacturers are also developing fuel cell power supplies for portable applications, providing a few watts up to several kilowatts of electricity (Fig. 9). Fuelled by stored natural gas, propane, methanol or hydrogen gas, portable fuel cells may one day replace both gasoline and diesel-engine generators for portable applications as well as conventional batteries for uses such as remote lighting, laptop computers and mobile phones.

Direct methanol fuel cells for portable power

Direct methanol fuel cells were invented and initially developed at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. They were designed to supply electricity for field troops in the Armed Forces and for applications with NASA (Fig. 11). The direct methanol fuel cell has the advantage over the hydrogen fuel cell in that they can use a liquid fuel i.e. methanol without the need for external reforming. Liquid fuel is easy to store and has a high energy density compared to compressed hydrogen. At present, the direct methanol fuel cell suffers from relatively low efficiency and high cost, owing to required platinum loading compared to that of the hydrogen fuel cell. However, as this improves, it is expected that the direct methanol fuel cell will play a leading role in providing power for portable and possibly transportation applications.

THE SCIENCE OF THE PEM FUEL CELL

4.1 The Chemistry of a Single Cell

In a PEM fuel cell, two half-cell reactions take place simultaneously, an oxidation reaction (loss of electrons) at the anode and a reduction reaction (gain of electrons) at the cathode. These two reactions make up the total oxidation-reduction (redox) reaction of the fuel cell, the formation of water from hydrogen and oxygen gases. As in an electrolyzer, the anode and cathode are separated by an electrolyte, which allows ions to be transferred from one side to the other (Fig. 12). The electrolyte in a PEM fuel cell is a solid acid supported within the membrane. The solid acid electrolyte is saturated with water so that the transport of ions can proceed.

Diagram of a single PEM fuel cell When an electrical load is attached across the anode and the cathode of the fuel cell a redox reaction occurs. The working voltage produced by one cell in this process is between 0.5 and 0.8 volts, depending on the load. To create practical working voltages, individual fuel cells are stacked together in series to form a fuel cell stack.

PEM Fuel Cell:

- (Eq. 3.1) Cathode reaction: O2 + 2e-

At the anode, the hydrogen molecules first come into contact with a platinum catalyst on the electrode surface. The hydrogen molecules break apart, bonding to the platinum surface forming weak H-Pt bonds. As the hydrogen molecule is now broken the oxidation reaction can proceed. Each hydrogen atom releases its electron, which travels around the external circuit to the cathode (it is this flow of electrons that is refered to as electrical current). The remaining hydrogen proton bonds with a water molecule on the membrane surface, forming a hydronium ion (H3O+). The hydronium ion travels through the membrane material to the cathode, leaving the platinum catalyst site free for the next hydrogen molecule. At the cathode, oxygen molecules come into contact with a platinum catalyst on the electrode surface. The oxygen molecules break apart bonding to the platinum surface forming weak O-Pt bonds, enabling the reduction reaction to proceed. Each oxygen atom then leaves the platinum catalyst site, combining with two electrons (which have travelled through the external circuit) and two protons (which have travelled through the membrane) to form one molecule of water. The redox reaction has now been completed. The platinum catalyst on the cathode electrode is again free for the next oxygen molecule to arrive. This exothermic reaction, the formation of water from hydrogen and oxygen gases, has an enthalpy of -286 kilojoules of energy per mole of water formed. The free energy available to perform work decreases as a function of temperature. At 25 C, 1 atmosphere the free energy available to perform work is about -237 kilojoules per mole. This energy is observed as electricity and heat.

The Polymer Electrolyte Membrane (PEM)

The membrane material used in a PEM cell is a polymer. PEMs are generally produced in large sheets. The electrode catalyst layer is applied to both sides, and is cut to the appropriate size. A

single PEM sheet is typically between 50 to 175 microns thick, or around the thickness of 2 to 7 sheets of paper. A common PEM material used today is Nafion. Developed in the 1970s by Dupont, Nafion consists of Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) chains, commonly known as Teflon forming the backbone of the membrane. Attached to the Teflon chains, are side chains ending with sulphonic acid (HSO3) groups (Fig. 13). A close-up view of the membrane material shows long, spaghettilike chain molecules with clusters of sulphonate side chains (Fig. 14). An interesting feature of this material is that whereas the long chain molecules are hydrophobic (repel water), the ulphonate side chains are highly hydrophylic (attract water). For the membrane to conduct ions efficiently the sulphonate side chains must absorb large quantities of water. Within these hydrated regions, the hydrogen ions of the sulphonic acid groups can then move freely, enabling the membrane to transfer hydrogen ions, in the form of hydronium ions from one side of the membrane to the other

Chemical structure of a PEM fuel cell membrane Long chains of PTFE (Teflon) with side chain ending with sulphonic acid (HSO3) (Source: Larminie & Dicks, February

Close-up of a PEM fuel cell membrane. Diagram shows long spaghetti-like chain molecules of Teflon surrounding clusters of hydrated regions around the sulphonate side chains. The eflon chains form the backbone of the membrane. The hydrated regions around the sulphonate side chains become the electrolyte.

Cell Voltage and Efficiency

If the fuel cell was perfect at transferring chemical energy into electrical energy, the ideal cell voltage (thermodynamic reversible cell potential) of the hydrogen fuel cell would be at 25 C, 1 atmosphere, 1.23 volts. As the fuel cell heats up to operating temperature, around 80 C the ideal cell voltage drops to about 1.18 volts. However there are many limiting factors that reduce the fuel cell voltage further. The voltage out of the cell is a good measure of electrical efficiency; the

lower the voltage, the lower the electrical efficiency and the more chemical energy is released in the formation of water and transferred into heat.

The primary losses that contribute to a reduction in cell voltage are:

Activation losses. Activation losses are a result of the energy required to initiate the reaction. This is a result of the catalyst. The better the catalyst the less activation energy is required. Platinum forms an excellent catalyst however there is much research underway for better materials. A limiting factor to power density available from a fuel cell is the speed at which the reactions can take place. The cathode reaction, (the reduction of oxygen) is about 100 times slower than that of the reaction at the anode, thus it is the cathode reaction that limits power density. Fuel crossover and internal currents. Fuel crossover and internal currents are a result of fuel that crosses directly through the electrolyte, from the anode to the cathode without releasing electrons through the external circuit, thereby decreasing the efficiency of the fuel cell. Ohmic losses. Ohmic losses are a result of the combined resistances of the various components of the fuel cell. This includes the resistance of the electrode materials, the resistance of the electrolyte membrane and the resistance of the various interconnections. Concentration losses (also referred to as mass transport). These losses result from the reduction of the concentration of hydrogen and oxygen gases at the electrode. For example, following the reaction new gases must be made immediately available at the catalyst sites. With the buildup of water at the cathode, particularly at high currents, catalyst sites can become clogged, restricting oxygen access. It is therefore important to remove this excess water, hence the term mass transport

DIRECT METHANOL FUEL CELL

A direct methanol fuel cell also uses a PEM membrane. However, other catalysts in addition to platinum are required on the anode side of the membrane to break the methanol bond in the reaction forming carbon dioxide, hydrogen ions and free electrons. As with the hydrogen fuel cell, the free electrons flow from the anode of the cell through an external circuit to the cathode

and the hydrogen protons are transferred through the electrolyte membrane. At the cathode the free electrons and the hydrogen protons react with oxygen to form water.

Direct Methanol Fuel Cell:

- (Eq. 4.1) Cathode reaction: 3/2O2 + 6H+ + 6e-

6. WHERE WILL THE HYDROGEN COME FROM?

One of the most important questions to be asked is: where the hydrogen will come from? A very interesting study published by the Pembina Institute, based in Calgary, Alberta, compared total carbon dioxide emissions of fuel cell vehicles using hydrogen produced from a variety of methods (Fig 15). The results clearly show that the choice as to which method will be used to produce the hydrogen will be a critical environmental decision. For example, if hydrogen is produced from the electrolysis of water and the electrolysers are powered from the electrical grid, whereby the electricity is produced from a coal burning power station, then there will be no reduction in carbon dioxide emissions compared with the levels of the present day internal combustion engine. In fact, there will be an increase in metals & pollutants into the environment. If on the other hand the electrolyzer is powered from a renewable energy source, through use of a solar panel, a wind turbine or a hydroelectric turbine, there will be no emissions of carbon dioxide. The choice has yet to be made as to which method of hydrogen production will dominate as the fuel cell industry grows.

Carbon dioxide emissions (kilograms) per 1000 km

1 Car with internal combustion engine 2 Fuel cell car with hydrogen produced from Alberta electric grid (coal generation) 3 Fuel cell car with onboard gasoline reformer 4 Fuel cell car with onboard methanol reformer 5 Fuel cell car using hydrogen from natural gas (distributed from urban retail outlets) 6 Fuel cell car using hydrogen from natural gas (made at large refineries) Graph comparing carbon dioxide emissions of cars, using different types of fuel sources Reformation of hydrocarbon fuels

For the short term, because of the abundance of natural gas, the availability of methanol and propane, and the lack of a hydrogen infrastructure, it is expected that hydrocarbon fuels will be the dominant fuels for stationary fuel cell applications. For as long as these fuels are cheaply available, reformation of a hydrocarbon fuel is the most cost efficient method of producing hydrogen. In the reformation of a hydrocarbon fuel however, there is an emission of carbon dioxide. Although carbon dioxide is not considered a pollutant, controversy exists that man-made emissions may contribute to global warming.

Renewable Energy Systems

Hydrogen can be produced sustainably with no emission of carbon dioxide from renewable energy systems. An example of such a system is the use of a solar panel, a wind turbine or a micro-hydro generator to convert the radiant energy of sunlight into electrical power, which drives an electrolyzer. The electrolyzer breaks apart water producing hydrogen and oxygen gases. The hydrogen is stored for use by the fuel cell and the oxygen is released into the atmosphere. Thus when the sun shines, the wind blows or the water flows, the electrolyser can produce hydrogen. A power system incorporating hydrogen from renewable sources and a fuel cell is a closed system, as none of the products or reactants, water, hydrogen and oxygen are lost to the outside environment. The water consumed by the electrolyzer is converted to gases. The gases are converted back to water. The electrical energy produced by the solar panel is transferred to chemical energy in the form of gases. The gases can be stored and transported, to be reconverted back to electricity These systems are truly sustainable, for as long as there is sunlight there can be electrical power, available where and when required

Electrical power from renewable energy sources. In the past, the limiting factors of renewable energy have been the storage and transport of that energy. With the use of an electrolyzer, a method of storing and transporting hydrogen gas, and a fuel cell, electrical power from renewable energy sources can be delivered where and when required, cleanly, efficiently and sustainably.

BENEFITS AND OBSTACLES TO THE SUCCESS OF FUEL CELLS AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF A HYDROGEN-BASED ECONOMY

Benefits Fuel cells are efficient.

They convert hydrogen and oxygen directly into electricity and water, with no combustion in the process. The resulting efficiency is between 50 and 60%, about double that of an internal combustion engine. Fuel cells are clean.

If hydrogen is the fuel, there are no pollutant emissions from a fuel cell itself, only the production of pure water. In contrast to an internal combustion engine, a fuel cell produces no emissions of sulphur dioxide, which can lead to acid rain, nor nitrogen oxides which produce smog nor dust particulates. Fuel cells are quiet.

A fuel cell itself has no moving parts, although a fuel cell system may have pumps and fans. As a result, electrical power is produced relatively silently. Many hotels and resorts in quiet locations, for example, could replace diesel engine generators with fuel cells for both main power supply or for backup power in the event of power outages. Fuel cells are modular.

That is, fuel cells of varying sizes can be stacked together to meet a required power demand. As mentioned earlier, fuel cell systems can provide power over a large range, from a few watts to megawatts. Fuel cells are environmentally safe.

They produce no hazardous waste products, and their only by-product is water (or water and carbon dioxide in the case of methanol cells). Fuel cells may give us the opportunity to provide the world with sustainable electrical power.

Obstacles

At present there are many uncertainties to the success of fuel cells and the development of a hydrogen economy: Fuel cells must obtain mass-market acceptance to succeed.

This acceptance depends largely on price, reliability, longevity of fuel cells and the accessibility and cost of fuel. Compared to the price of present day alternatives e.g. diesel-engine generators and batteries, fuel cells are comparatively expensive. In order to be competitive, fuel cells need to be mass produced less expensive materials developed. An infrastructure for the mass-market availability of hydrogen, or methanol fuel initially, must also develop.

At present there is no infrastructure in place for either of these fuels. As it is we must rely on the activities of the oil and gas companies to introduce them. Unless motorists are able to obtain fuel conveniently and affordably, a mass market for motive applications will not develop. At present a large portion of the investment in fuel cells and hydrogen technology has come from auto manufacturers.

However, if fuel cells prove unsuitable for automobiles, new sources of investment for fuel cells and the hydrogen industry will be needed. Changes in government policy could also derail fuel cell and hydrogen technology development.

At present stringent environmental laws and regulations, such as the California Low Emission Vehicle Program have been great encouragements to these fields. Deregulation laws in the utility

industry have been a large impetus for the development of distributed stationary power generators. Should these laws change it could create adverse effects on further development. At present platinum is a key component to fuel cells.

Platinum is a scarce natural resource; the largest supplies to the world platinum market are from South Africa, Russia and Canada. Shortages of platinum are not anticipated, however changes in Government policies could affect the supply.

II. MODULAR FUEL CELL STACK

Fuel cell stacks are constructed by stacking several individual cells, which is equivalent to connecting many voltage sources in series, each with its own internal impedance. The fuel and oxygen input lines to each cell in the stack are connected in parallel in order to ensure that the pressure on the anode and cathode of every cell is kept at a similar level. This is done by means of manifolds that connect the fuel and oxygen lines to the actual cells in the stack. The voltage produced by each cell in the stack, as well as its internal impedance, is a function of fuel pressure, membrane humidity, and state of the catalyst. The fuel pressure on each cell is, in theory, constant due to the input manifold, but in reality, it may drop due to water condensation or other obstructions. Cells receiving a lower pressure will produce a reduced voltage. The membrane humidity may vary from cell to cell depending on the heat distribution within the fuel cell. Cells with a drier membrane will produce less voltage than cells with a more moisturized membrane, and this will produce a voltage closer to its nominal. All these reasons contribute to an uneven voltage distribution through the fuel cell stack. As an example, Fig. 3 shows the V I characteristic measured from different cells in a 24-cell 12-V/150-W H2 air PEM fuel cell stack with an active area of 50 cm2 . The characteristics were obtained at room temperature (20C) with a fuel pressure of 2 lbf/in2 ; the maximum cell temperature was measured to be 62 C.

It is clear from Fig. 3 that the voltage produced by each cell in the stack differs from adjacent cells. Further, a set of cells is shown to produce less voltage when compared to a

Fig. 4 Individual cell P I

Fig. 5 Modular fuel cell simplified equivalent circuit

Healthier group Fig. 4 shows the power (in watts) generated by each individual cell in this test stack. Comparing the maximum power points P1, P2, and P3 in Fig. 4, it becomes evident that underperforming cells in the fuel cell can produce less power than the cells that are in good operating condition. Although, as shown in Fig. 3, fuel cells exhibit a nonlinear behavior in their voltagecurrent characteristic, it is possible to use a linearized model to predict their behavior. In steady state, the simplest electrical model that can be constructed consists of a Thevenin voltage source (Vc ) in series with a resistor (Rc ) [Fig. 5(a)] whose values are functions of fuel pressure, humidity, and catalyst state, as discussed before. From this equivalent circuit model, the power that a single cell in the stack can supply can be calculated by

Additionally, from circuit theory, the maximum power that can be extracted from such an electric circuit is given by

From (1) and (2), it is apparent that increasing the load of the fuel cell beyond the maximum power point given by (2) results in increased losses and reduced output power, as can be observed from Fig. 4. Therefore, the load current should be limited to avoid going beyond the maximum power point to a value given by

Further, since in a conventional system all the cells in the stack are connected in series, the load current in every cell has to be limited to the maximum current that the weakest cell in the system can supply, which is around 8 A in the case shown in Figs. 3 and 4. Considering this fact, the maximum output power of the stack can be calculated by

If the load current exceeds the limit given by (3) for a long period of time, the stack overheats due to the additional internal losses in the mal performing cells, and operation of the fuel cell has to be discontinued. However, from Fig. 4, it is clear that healthier cells, which have a smaller internal resistance and larger open circuit voltage, can supply higher load currents (10 or 12 A). From this analysis, it appears that to avoid limiting the current in healthy cells due to the presence of bad cells in the system, a modular approach is more suitable. This modular system is shown in Fig. 5(b), where additional terminals on each cell allow loading cells

independently, and therefore, healthier cells can generate more power than in the conventional series-connected approach. For this modular case, the maximum power that can be generated in the stack is given by the sum of the maximum powers of all cells, and can be calculated by

To compare both approaches, traditional and modular, the maximum power that can be produced by each is evaluated. For this, let us consider a stack constructed with three cells and with the equivalent circuit parameters as shown in Table I, where Va and Ra are the base voltage and resistance of the system. Using the parameters of Table I and (3), we can find that in the case of the conventional approach, the load current should be limited to 0.32 Va/Ra ; this is due to the internal impedance

Fig. 6. (a) Schematic drawing of the modular fuel cell stack. (b) Prototype of the 12-V, 150-W, 24-cell modular fuel cell stack.

of cell 3, which is the weakest cell in this stack. Thus, according to (4), the maximum power that can be produced in this case is 0.534 V 2 a /Ra . Now, for themodular approach where each cell is loaded independently [Fig. 5(b)] using (5), the maximum power that the system can generate is 0.568 V 2 a /Ra . In other words, the same stack can produce 6.4% more power if the cells are loaded independently. From these results, it is shown that to optimize the operation of the stack, one should be able to control the current flowing through each individual cell in the stack [Fig. 5(b)]. But such an approach proves to be impractical as well as uneconomical. A more convenient approach is to divide the stack in sections of five to ten cells, as shown in Fig. 2, which is done by installing

additional electric terminals in the stack (Fig. 6). Having access to these additional terminals allows loading each section differently, which, in turn, allows maximizing the power generated by the stack. This has the obvious advantage of increasing the overall reliability of the system. Fig. 7 shows the V I characteristic of each of the three sections in the prototype fuel cell stack measured at room temperature with a fuel pressure of2 lbf/in2. It can be observed that the performance of each of the sections is quite different. The nominal current of the stack (12 A) can only be drawn from sections 1 and 3. On the other hand, section 2 can only supply a maximum current of 9 A before its voltage collapses. Fig. 8 shows the power produced by each section in the fuel cell stack as function of the load current. If a traditional approach is used, to avoid overheating, the current in the stack should be limited to a value given by its weakest section (section 2, 9 A),

Fig. 7 V I characteristics of the proposed modular fuel cell stack with three sections.

Fig. 8 Output power produced by each section of the modular fuel cell stack

but due to the modular construction of the system, the other sections can be operated at different load currents to optimize their operation. Table II shows a comparison of the power that this prototype stack can produce if operated in a traditional or modular fashion. These results are obtained from Fig. 8, and the results for the traditional approach are obtained by multiplying the section voltages by the maximum current that the weakest section can produce (9 A). On the other hand, the power for the modular approach is calculated from the maximum power point for each of the sections in Fig. 8. It can be seen from Table II that by loading each section of the proposed modular stack differently, the fuel cell can produce 10% more power than using a conventional stack. Moreover, this result shows that despite having underperforming cells in the system, the power generated is close to the stack nominal.

DC-DC Power Converters

Dc-dc power converters are employed in a variety of applications, including power supplies for personal computers, office equipment, spacecraft power systems, laptop computers, and telecommunications equipment, as well as dc motor drives. The input to a dc-dc converter is an unregulated dc voltage Vg. The converter produces a regulated output voltage V, having a magnitude (and possibly polarity) that differs from Vg. For example, in a computer off-

line power supply, the 120 V or 240 V ac utility voltages is rectified, producing a dc voltage of approximately 170 V or 340 V, respectively. A dc-dc converter then reduces the voltage to the regulated 5 V or 3.3 V required by the processor ICs. High efficiency is invariably required, since cooling of inefficient power converters is difficult and expensive. The ideal dc-dc converter exhibits 100% efficiency; in practice, efficiencies of 70% to 95% are typically obtained. This is achieved using switched-mode, or chopper, circuits whose elements dissipate negligible power. Pulse-width modulation (PWM) allows control and regulation of the total output voltage. This approach is also employed in applications involving alternating current, including highefficiency dc-ac power converters (inverters and power amplifiers), ac-ac power converters, and some ac-dc power converters (low-harmonic rectifiers). A basic dc-dc converter circuit known as the buck converter is illustrated in Fig. 1. A single-pole double-throw (SPDT) switch is connected to the dc input voltage Vg as shown. The switch output voltage .

The buck converter consists of a switch network that reduces the dc component of voltage, and a low-pass filter that removes the high-frequency switching harmonics: (a) schematic, (b) switch voltage waveform

vs(t) is equal to Vg when the switch is in position 1, and is equal to zero when the switch is in position 2. The switch position is varies periodically, such that vs(t) is a rectangular waveform having period Ts and duty cycle D. The duty cycle is equal to the fraction of time that the switch is connected in position 1, and hence 0 D 1. The switching frequency fs is equal to 1/Ts. In practice, the SPDT switch is realized using semiconductor devices such as diodes, power MOSFETs, IGBTs, BJTs, or thyristors. Typical switching frequencies lie in the range 1 kHz to 1 MHz, depending on the speed of the semiconductor devices. The switch network changes the dc component of the voltage. By Fourier analysis, the dc component of a waveform is given by its average value. The average value of vs(t) is given by

The integral is equal to the area under the waveform, or the height Vg multiplied by the time DTs. It can be seen that the switch network reduces the dc component of the voltage by a factor equal to the duty cycle D. Since 0 D 1, the dc component of Vs is less than or equal to Vg. The power dissipated by the switch network is ideally equal to zero. When the switch contacts are closed, then the voltage across the contacts is equal to zero and hence the power dissipation is zero. When the switch contacts are open, then there is zero current and the power dissipation is again equal to zero. Therefore, the ideal switch network is able to change the dc component of voltage without dissipation of power. In addition to the desired dc voltage component Vs, the switch waveform vs(t) also contains undesired harmonics of the switching frequency. In most applications, these harmonics must be removed, such that the converter output voltage v(t) is essentially equal to the dc component V = Vs. A low-pass filter is employed for this purpose. The converter of Fig. 1 contains a singlesection L-C low-pass filter. The filter has corner frequency f0 given by

The corner frequency f0 is chosen to be sufficiently less than the switching frequency fs, so that the filter essentially passes only the dc component of vs(t). To the extent that the inductor and capacitor are ideal, the filter removes the switching harmonics without dissipation of power. Thus, the converter produces a dc output voltage whose magnitude is controllable via the duty cycle D, using circuit elements that (ideally) do not dissipate power. The conversion ratio M(D) is defined as the ratio of the dc output voltage V to the dc input voltage Vg under steady-state conditions:

For the buck converter, M(D) is given by

M(D) = D (4

This equation is plotted in Fig. 2. It can be seen that the dc output voltage V is controllable between 0 and Vg, by adjustment of the duty cycle D. Figure 3 illustrates one way to realize the switch network in the buck converter, using a power MOSFET and diode. A gate drive circuit switches the MOSFET between the conducting (on) and blocking (off) states, as commanded by a logic signal (t). When (t) is high (for 0 < t < DTs), then MOSFET Q1 conducts with negligible drain-to-source voltage. Hence, vs(t) is approximately equal to Vg, and the diode is reversebiased. The positive inductor current iL(t) flows through the MOSFET. At time t = DTs, (t) becomes low, commanding MOSFET Q1 to turn off. The inductor current must continue to flow; hence, iL(t) forward-biases diode D1, and vs(t) is now approximately equal to zero. Provided that the inductor current iL(t) remains positive, then diode D1 conducts for the remainder of the switching period. Diodes that operate in the manner are called freewheeling diodes.

Since the converter output voltage v(t) is a function of the switch duty cycle D, a control

system can be constructed that varies the duty cycle to cause the output voltage to follow a given reference vr. Figure 3 illustrates the block diagram of a simple converter feedback system. The output voltage is sensed using a voltage divider, and is compared with an accurate dc reference voltage vr. The resulting error signal is passed through an op-amp compensation network. The analog voltage vc(t) is next fed into a pulse-width modulator. The modulator produces a switched voltage waveform that controls the gate of the power MOSFET Q1. The duty cycle D of this waveform is proportional to the control voltage vc(t). If this control system is well designed, then the duty cycle is automatically adjusted such that the converter output voltage v follows the reference voltage vr, and is essentially independent of variations in vg or load current

Realization of the ideal SPDT switch using a transistor and freewheeling diode. In addition, a feedback loop is added for regulation of the output voltage.

Converter circuit topologies

A large number of dc-dc converter circuits are known that can increase or decrease the magnitude of the dc voltage and/or invert its polarity [1-5]. Figure 4 illustrates several commonly used dc-dc converter circuits, along with their respective conversion ratios. In each example, the switch is realized using a power MOSFET and diode; however, other semiconductor switches such as IGBTs, BJTs, or thyristors can be substituted if desired. The first converter is the buck converter, which reduces the dc voltage and has conversion ratio M(D) = D. In a similar topology known as the boost converter, the positions of the switch and inductor are interchanged. This converter produces an output voltage V that is greater in magnitude than the input voltage Vg. Its conversion ratio is M(D) = 1/(1 D). In the buck-boost converter, the switch alternately connects the inductor across the power input and output voltages. This converter inverts the polarity of the voltage, and can either increase or decrease the voltage magnitude. The conversion ratio is M(D) = - D/(1 D). The Cuk converter contains inductors in series with the converter input and output ports. The switch network alternately connects a capacitor to the input and output inductors. The conversion ratio M(D) is identical to that of the buck-boost converter. Hence, this converter also inverts the voltage polarity, while either increasing or decreasing the voltage magnitude. The single-ended primary inductance converter (SEPIC) can also either increase or decrease the voltage magnitude. However, it does not invert the polarity. The conversion ratio is M(D) = D/(1 D).

Several basic dc-dc converters and their dc conversion ratios M(D) = V/Vg.

Transformer isolation

In the majority of applications, it is desired to incorporate a transformer into the switching converter, to obtain dc isolation between the converter input and output. For example, in off-line power supply applications, isolation is usually required by regulatory agencies. This isolation could be obtained by simply connecting a 50 Hz or 60 Hz transformer at the power

supply ac input terminals. However, since transformer size and weight vary inversely with frequency, incorporation of the transformer into the converter can make significant improvements: the transformer then operates at the converter switching frequency of tens or hundreds of kilohertz. The size of modern ferrite power transformers is minimized at operating frequencies ranging from several hundred kilohertz to roughly one egahertz. These high frequencies lead to dramatic reductions in transformer size. When a large step-up or step-down conversion ratio is required, the use of a transformer can allow better converter optimization. By proper choice of the transformer turns ratio, the voltage or current stresses imposed on the transistors and diodes can be minimized, leading to improved efficiency and lower cost. Multiple dc outputs can also be obtained in an inexpensive manner, by adding multiple secondary windings and converter secondary-side circuits. The secondary turns ratios are chosen to obtain the desired output voltages. Usually, only one output voltage can be regulated, via control of the converter duty cycle, so wider tolerances must be allowed for the auxiliary output voltages. Cross regulation is a measure of the variation in an auxiliary output voltage, given that the main output voltage is regulated perfectly. The basic operation of transformers in most power converters can be understood by replacing the transformer with the simplified model illustrated in Fig. 8. The model neglects losses and imperfect coupling between windings; such phenomena are usually considered to be converter nonidealities. The model consists of an ideal transformer plus a shunt inductor known as the magnetizing inductance LM. This inductor models the magnetization of the physical transformer core, and hence it must obey all of the usual rules for inductors. In particular, volt-second balance must be maintained on the magnetizing inductance. Furthermore, since the voltages of all windings of the ideal transformer are proportional, volt-second balance must be maintained for each winding. Failure to achieve volt-second balance leads to transformer saturation and, usually, destruction of the converter. The means by which transformer volt-second balance is achieved is known as the transformer reset mechanism. T here are several ways of incorporating transformer isolation into any dc-dc converter. The full bridge, half-bridge, forward, and push-pull converters are commonly used isolated versions of the buck converter. Similar isolated variants of the boost converter are known. The fly back converter is an isolated version of the buck-boost converter. Isolated

variants of the SEPIC and Cuk converter are also known. The full-bridge, forward, and fly back converters are briefly described in this section

Modeling a physical transformer such that its basic operation within an isolated dc-dc converter can be understood: (a) transformer schematic symbol, (b) equivalent circuit model that includes magnetizing inductance LM and an ideal transformer

There are several ways of incorporating transformer isolation into any dc-dc converter. The full bridge, half-bridge, forward, and push-pull converters are commonly used isolated versions of the buck converter. Similar isolated variants of the boost converter are known. The flyback

converter is an isolated version of the buck-boost converter. Isolated variants of the SEPIC and Cuk converter are also known. The full-bridge, forward, and flyback converters are briefly described in this section.

The full bridge transformer-isolated buck converter

Waveforms of the full bridge circuit of Fig.

Full-bridge buck-derived converter

The full-bridge transformer-isolated buck converter is sketched in Fig. 9. Typical waveforms are illustrated in Fig. 10. The transformer primary winding is driven symmetrically, such that the net volt-seconds applied over two switching periods is equal to zero. During the first switching period, transistors Q1 and Q4 conduct for time DTs. The volt-seconds applied to the primary winding during this switching period are equal to VgDTs. During the following switching period, transistors Q2 and Q3 conduct for time DTs, thereby applying VgDTs volt-seconds to the transformer primary winding. Over two switching periods, the net applied volt seconds is equal to zero. In practice, there exist small imbalances such as the small differences in the transistor forward voltage drops or transistor switching times, so that the average primary winding voltage is small but nonzero. This nonzero dc voltage can lead to transformer saturation and destruction of the converter. Transformer saturation under steady state conditions can be avoided by placing a capacitor in series with the transformer primary. Imbalances then induce a dc voltage component across the capacitor, rather than across the transformer primary. Another solution is the use of current programmed control; the series capacitor is then omitted. By application of the principle of volt-second balance to the output filter inductor voltage, the dc load voltage can be shown to be V = nDVg

So, as in the buck converter, the output voltage can be controlled by adjustment of the transistor duty cycle D. An additional increase or decrease of the voltage V can be obtained via the physical transformer turns ratio n. The full bridge configuration is typically used in switching power supplies at power levels of approximately 750 W or greater. At lower power levels, approaches such as the forward converter are preferred because of their lower parts count. Four transistors and their associated drive circuits are required. The utilization of the transformer is good, leading to small transformer size. The transformer operating frequency is one-half of the transistor switching frequency.

The forward converter, a single-transistor isolated buck converter

Forward converter

The forward converter is illustrated in Fig. 11. This transformer-isolated converter is also based on the buck converter. It requires a single transistor, and therefore finds application at power levels lower than those encountered in the full bridge circuit. The maximum transistor duty cycle is limited in value; for the common choice n1 = n2, the duty cycle is limited to the range D < 0.5. The transformer is reset while transistor Q1 is in the off state. While the transistor conducts, the input voltage Vg is applied across the transformer primary winding. This causes the transformer magnetizing current to increase. When transistor Q1 turns off, the transformer magnetizing current forward biases diode D1, and hence voltage Vg is applied to the second winding. This negative voltage causes the magnetizing current to decrease. When the magnetizing current reaches zero, diode D1 turns off. Voltsecond balance is maintained on the transformer windings provided that the magnetizing current reaches zero before the end of the switching period. It can be shown that this occurs when

For the common choice n2 = n1, this expression reduces to

Hence, the maximum duty cycle is limited. If this limit is violated, then the transistor off time is insufficient to reset the transformer. There will then be a net increase in the transformer magnetizing current over each switching period, and the transformer will eventually saturate. The converter output voltage can be found by application of the principle of inductor volt-second balance to the output filter inductor L. The result is

This expression is subject to the constraint given in Eq. (12).

Figure 12 A two-transistor version of the forward converter

A two-transistor version of the forward converter is illustrated in Fig. 12. Transistors Q1 and Q2 are controlled by the same gate drive signal, such that they conduct simultaneously. After the transistors turn off, the transformer magnetizing current forward-biases diodes D1 and

D2. This applies voltage Vg across the primary winding, thereby resetting the transformer. The duty cycle is again limited to D < 0.5. This converter has the advantage that the transistor peak blocking voltage is limited to Vg, and is clamped by diodes D1 and D2. This circuit is quite popular in power supplies having 240 Vac inputs

Figure 13. The fly back converter, a single-transistor isolated buck-boost converter

Fly back converter

The flyback converter of Fig. 13 is based on the buck-boost converter. Although the two-winding magnetic device is represented using the same symbol as the transformer, a more descriptive name is twowinding inductor. This device is sometimes also called a flyback transformer. Unlike the ideal transformer, current does not flow simultaneously in both windings of the flyback transformer. Rather, the flyback transformer magnetizing inductance assumes the role of the inductor of the buck-boost converter. The magnetizing current is switched between the primary and secondary windings.

When transistor Q1 conducts, diode D1 is reverse-biased. The primary winding then functions as an inductor, connected to the input source Vg. Energy is stored in the magnetic field of the flyback transformer. When transistor Q1 turns off, the current ceases to flow in the

primary winding. The magnetizing current, referred to the secondary winding, now forwardbiases diode D1. Energy stored in the magnetic field of the flyback transformer is then transferred to the dc load. Application of the principle of inductor volt-second balance to the transformer primary winding leads to the following solution for the conversion ratio of the flyback converter:

Thus, the conversion ratio of the flyback converter is similar to that of the buck-boost converter, but with an added factor of n. The flyback converter has traditionally been used in the highvoltage power supplies of televisions and computer monitors. It also finds widespread application in switching power supplies at the 50 W to 100 W power range. This converter has the advantage of very low parts count. Multiple outputs can be obtained using a minimum number of added elements: each auxiliary output requires only an additional winding, diode, and capacitor. However, in comparison with buck-derived transformer-isolated converters such as the full bridge and forward circuits, the flyback converter has the disadvantage of poor cross regulation

III. PROPOSED MODULAR DCDC CONVERTER

To take advantage of the modular fuel cell stack, an appropriate dcdc converter and control scheme are required. The converter should have as many independently controllable inputs as there are sections in the stack. In addition, since the positive terminal of one section in the stack also serves as the

Fig. 9 Proposed modular dcdc converter

Negative terminal for the next section, the converter should provide isolation between its input and output to avoid circulating currents. A converter meeting these specifications can be constructed by using an arrangement of isolated dcdc converter modules, where the inputs of each module are connected across each of the sections of the stack and their outputs are connected in series in order to add the output voltages of the different modules, thus obtaining a higher output voltage. Such a modular dcdc converter is shown in Fig. 9, where the converter is composed of three pushpull modules. As discussed earlier, another advantage of constructing a fuel cell stack with several sections is that faulty portions of the stack can be bypassed, while the rest of the stack can continue operation. To implement this function, each of the modules used to construct the dcdc converter should be able to stop extracting power from the section they are connected to and set its output impedance to zero. This function can be accomplished by removing the gating signals to the transistors. In addition, it is necessary to add a switch (Sx ) at the output of each module to short-circuit the output capacitor of the module and bypass it. In order to optimize the power extraction from each of the sections in the fuel cell, an appropriate control scheme needs to be devised. From Figs. 7 and 8, it can be observed that the voltage across the terminals of each

section in the stack is a good indication of how much power it can generate; thus, this information can be used to better distribute the power extracted from each section. A section producing a higher voltage can generate more power than a section that produces a lower voltage. Therefore, by controlling the load current on each section in the stack as a function of the voltage, they produce results in healthier sections supplying more power than underperforming sections. This, in turn, reduces internal losses and improves the overall efficiency of the system. Since the outputs of the modules are connected in series, their output currents io are identical. Now, if the modules are constructed by pushpull converters, the input current of every module is given by (6), where Dn is the duty cycle of the nth module and N1 and N2 are the transformer primary and secondary turns

Fig. 10. Proposed control scheme.

Thus, the input current of each module can be controlled by setting an appropriate duty cycle. The duty cycle for each module is calculated as shown in Fig. 10. In this block diagram, the output voltage of the converter is maintained constant to the value set by VO, ref. The output of the main voltage loop compensator is then used to calculate the required duty cycle for each dcdc converter by multiplying it with the corresponding reference signal for each module.

These reference signals are calculated by taking into account the voltage produced by each of the sections in the stack and the number of modules that compose the dcdc converter. Each of the reference signals is calculated by the weighting function shown as

Where VSn is the voltage produced by the nth section in the fuel cell stack, VSi is the voltage produced by the ith section in the stack, and NAC is the total number of active sections in the stack. Thus, the reference signal for the nth module is given by the ratio between the voltage produced by the nth section in stack and the total voltage produced by the stack. The number of active sections is defined by all the sections that produce a voltage above a minimum value. Now, if one of the sections produces a voltage below this threshold level, then that section can be considered faulty. Thus, it cannot produce power and needs to be discarded. In this case, the controller reduces NAC by 1 and sets the reference signal to the respective module to zero. Additionally, this has the effect of increasing the reference signals of the remaining modules to compensate for the loss of one stack section. The implementation of this control scheme can be carried out by combining digital and analog controllers. The calculation of the reference signals for each of the modules is done digitally by means of a DSP. The reference signals are then feed to analog controllers located on each of the dcdc modules.

IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

To verify the operation of the proposed fuel cell stack and converter, a laboratory prototype was built. The test system is composed of a 12-V/150-WH2 air PEM modular fuel cell stack consisting of three sections of eight cells, each with an active area of 50 cm2 , and a modular dcdc converter composed of three pushpull modules. The dcdc converter is designed to supply a 22-V load; thus, if all the sections in the fuel cell produce the same voltage across

their terminals, each module needs to provide one-third of the total output voltage Vo and output power.

Fig. 11 Modular fuel cell section voltages during a load transient

However, since the dcdc converter has to be designed for continue operation under the condition of having faulty sections, each module is designed in order to provide the total output voltage Vo of the converter and one-third of its output power, i.e., 22 V and 50 W. The dcdc converter and modules are connected as shown in the schematic in Fig. 9. This prototype system was tested at room temperature and with an H2 supply at a pressure of 2 lbf/in2 As a first test, a load change is applied at the output terminals of the converter to verify that the controller adjusts the loading of each section according to their relative health. Fig. 11 shows the voltage across each of the sections in the prototype stack when the output load of the system increases from 40% to 90%. During this test, the voltage at the output terminals of the converter was maintained constant at 22 V. In this figure, Ch. 1 shows the voltage in section 3 (Vs3 ), Ch. 2 the voltage in section 1 (Vs1 ), and Ch. 3 the voltage in section 2 (Vs2 ). As can be seen from Fig. 11, initially, the voltages of the three sections were 6.4, 5.6, and 6.2 V, respectively. After the load increases, the controller adjusts the module reference signals in order

to maintain the output voltage of the converter constant. And thus, the three section voltages drop due to the increase in the output load to 6, 5.5, and 5 V. Fig. 12 shows the current drawn from each section in the stack before and after the load change. As can be observed from these results before the load change, the voltage supplied by section 3 was the highest in the stack; consequently, the current and power supplied by it are the highest. On the other hand, the voltage produced by section 2 in the prototype stack is the lowest, and therefore, the current drawn from it is less than the other two sections. After the transient, the voltage across each section drops due to the increase in output load, and the currents drawn from the three sections increase to maintain the output voltage of the system constant; however, their magnitudes are different. As can be seen from Figs. 11 and 12, the section producing the highest voltage carries a larger share of the output power and the weakest section produces a smaller portion of the load. The other functionality offered by the proposed converter is the ability to discard a section of the fuel cell if the controller detects that the voltage across its terminals drops below a certain

Fig. 12. Modular fuel cell section currents during a load transient

Fig. 13 Operation of the modular fuel cell modular dcdc converter under a fault Note that in section 2, current is reduced to zero, while the output voltage continues to be regulated

Threshold level The prototype fuel cell is rated for 12 V at full load, and the nominal voltage of each of the sections at full-load is 4 V. Therefore, if a section is faulty, its terminal voltage will fall below this value. For this reason, the threshold level in the controller was set to 3.8 V. Fig. 13 shows the behavior of the system when a faulty section is detected, where Ch. 1 corresponds to the current drawn from section 3 (Is3 ), Ch. 3 the output voltage of the dcdc converter (Vo ), and Ch. 4 the current drawn from section 2 (Is2 ). In this case, section 2 in the stack is faulty, and it has to be discarded to avoid stack shutdown due to overheating. As can be seen in Fig. 13, once the fault condition is detected, the current drawn from the faulty section (section 2, Ch. 4) falls to zero In order to maintain the

output voltage of the system constant, the currents drawn from the remaining sections in the stack (Is1 and Is3 ) have to increase. This can be observed from Fig. 13, where the current supplied by section 3 (Is3 ) increases from 5 to 7 A after section 2 is discarded. The increase in the magnitude of the currents drawn from the remaining sections is regulated in terms of their relative health as determined by the converter control. As can be seen from these results, the system can continue operation despite having a faulty section; thus, the modular approach exhibits higher reliability than the traditional approach. To further verify the effectiveness of the proposed approach, thermal images of the fuel cell stack operating in both single stack and modular stack modes were taken. Fig. 14(a) shows a thermal image of the prototype stack operating in conventional mode. Load current in this case is 7.25 A, and the voltage of the

Fig. 14 Thermal comparison of conventional and modular fuel cell

Stack was measured to be 12 V, which is the nominal voltage of the fuel cell for full-load. The power generated by the stack operating under this condition was measured to be 87 W. It can be observed that the temperature distribution is quite uneven due to the presence of bad cells in section 2, while sections 1 and 3 show a lower temperature indicating that they are underused. The result of reconfiguring the stack for modular operation and the use of the proposed dcdc converter is shown in Fig. 14(b). In this case, the voltage across each of the sections was regulated by the dcdc converter modules to 4 V, i.e., the nominal voltage for each section. The currents drawn from sections 13 in the stack were measured to be 10, 6, and 9 A, respectively. Thus, the power generated by the fuel cell in this case is 102 W. As can be seen from Fig. 14(b), the temperature distribution within the stack in this case is even, indicating full utilization of the three sections. Moreover, due to the use of the modular approach, the fuel cell generates 15% more power than in the conventional case [Fig. 14(a)].

V. CONCLUSION

In this paper, a modular fuel cell stack and dcdc converter concept has been presented. It has been shown that the standard fuel cell stack can be reconfigured into several sections with smaller cell count, each supplying an isolated power module in the dcdc converter, resulting in a high-performance system. The proposed system has been shown to be fault tolerant and can continue to operate at a reduced power level under fuel cell or power module faults. Experimental results on a 12-V/150-W system demonstrate that under normal operation, the proposed system is capable of producing 10% additional power when compared to the traditional approach. In addition, experimental results also confirm the operation of the system under stack failure.

MAIN CIRCUIT

CONTROL CIRCUIT

RESULTS