Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 32297
Effect of Current Density, Temperature and Pressure on Proton Exchange Membrane Electrolyser Stack

Authors: Na Li, Samuel Simon Araya, Søren Knudsen Kær


This study investigates the effects of operating parameters of different current density, temperature and pressure on the performance of a proton exchange membrane (PEM) water electrolysis stack. A 7-cell PEM water electrolysis stack was assembled and tested under different operation modules. The voltage change and polarization curves under different test conditions, namely current density, temperature and pressure, were recorded. Results show that higher temperature has positive effect on overall stack performance, where temperature of 80 ℃ improved the cell performance greatly. However, the cathode pressure and current density has little effect on stack performance.

Keywords: PEM electrolysis stack, current density, temperature, pressure.

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 799


[1] M. Chandesris, V. Médeau, N. Guillet, S. Chelghoum, D. Thoby, and F. Fouda-Onana, “Membrane degradation in PEM water electrolyzer: Numerical modeling and experimental evidence of the influence of temperature and current density,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 1353–1366, 2015.
[2] F. Fouda-Onana, M. Chandesris, V. Médeau, S. Chelghoum, D. Thoby, and N. Guillet, “Investigation on the degradation of MEAs for PEM water electrolysers part I: Effects of testing conditions on MEA performances and membrane properties,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 41, no. 38, pp. 16627–16636, 2016.
[3] P. Lettenmeier et al., “Durable Membrane Electrode Assemblies for Proton Exchange Membrane Electrolyzer Systems Operating at High Current Densities,” Electrochimica Acta, vol. 210, pp. 502–511, 2016.
[4] S. A. Grigoriev, K. A. Dzhus, D. G. Bessarabov, and P. Millet, “Failure of PEM water electrolysis cells: Case study involving anode dissolution and membrane thinning,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 39, no. 35, pp. 20440–20446, 2014.
[5] S. al Shakhshir, X. Cui, S. Frensch, and S. K. Kær, “In-situ experimental characterization of the clamping pressure effects on low temperature polymer electrolyte membrane electrolysis,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 42, no. 34, pp. 21597–21606, 2017.
[6] P. Trinke, B. Bensmann, and R. Hanke-Rauschenbach, “Current density effect on hydrogen permeation in PEM water electrolyzers,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 42, no. 21, pp. 14355–14366, 2017.
[7] Ö. F. Selamet, F. Becerikli, M. D. Mat, and Y. Kaplan, “Development and testing of a highly efficient proton exchange membrane (PEM) electrolyzer stack,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 36, no. 17, pp. 11480–11487, 2011.
[8] S. S. Araya, S. J. Andreasen, and S. K. Kær, “Parametric sensitivity tests-european polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell stack test procedures,” Journal of Fuel Cell Science and Technology, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 1–7, 2014.
[9] H. Li et al., “Durability of PEM fuel cell cathode in the presence of Fe 3+ and Al 3+,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 195, no. 24, pp. 8089–8093, 2010.
[10] S. H. Frensch, F. Fouda-Onana, G. Serre, D. Thoby, S. S. Araya, and S. K. Kær, “Influence of the operation mode on PEM water electrolysis degradation,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 44, no. 57, pp. 29889-29898, 2019.