Figures (8)  Tables (2)

    • Figure 1. 

      Model validation on the effects of various operating temperatures on (a) ethanol conversion and H 2 yield, and (b) species mole fraction (lines represent the model results and the dots represent experimental measurements from López et al. [ 19] ).

    • Figure 2. 

      GT-SUITE model for direct reforming ethanol SOFC.

    • Figure 3. 

      Schematic diagram of direct reforming ethanol SOFC.

    • Figure 4. 

      The polarization curves of the fuel cell (lines represent the model results and the dots represent data from Dogdibegovic et al.) [ 26] .

    • Figure 5. 

      Effect of current density on both the voltage and power density at 650 °C, 700 °C, and 800 °C.

    • Figure 6. 

      Effect of current density on the species mole fraction for the 700 °C case.

    • Figure 7. 

      Current density and thermodynamic voltage potential along the axis of SOFC at the operating temperatures of (a) 700 °C and (b) 800 °C.

    • Figure 8. 

      Mole fractions of species along the axis of SOFC at the operating temperatures of (a) 700 °C and (b) 800 °C.

    • Reactions Reaction rate expression (mol/m 3/s)
      $ {\rm{C}_2H_5OH\to CH_4+H_2+CO }$ $ {716.67\;\mathrm{*}\;\mathrm{exp}\left(-\dfrac{87}{\mathrm{R}\mathrm{T}}\right)\;\mathrm{*}\;{\mathrm{p}}_{{\mathrm{C}}_{2}{\mathrm{H}}_{5}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{H}}\;\mathrm{*}\;{\mathrm{\rho }}_{\mathrm{c}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{t}} }$
      $ {\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}+{\mathrm{H}}_{2}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{ }\rightleftharpoons \mathrm{ }\mathrm{C}{\mathrm{O}}_{2}+{\mathrm{H}}_{2}} $ $ {6\;\mathrm{*}\;\mathrm{exp}\left(-\dfrac{70}{\mathrm{R}\mathrm{T}}\right)\;\mathrm{*}\;\left(\left({\mathrm{p}}_{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}}\;\mathrm{*}\;{\mathrm{p}}_{{\mathrm{H}}_{2}\mathrm{O}}\right)-\dfrac{\left({\mathrm{p}}_{\mathrm{C}{\mathrm{O}}_{2}}\;\mathrm{*}\;{\mathrm{p}}_{{\mathrm{H}}_{2}}\right)}{{\mathrm{K}}_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{q}2}}\right)\;\mathrm{*}\;{\mathrm{\rho }}_{\mathrm{c}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{t}}} $
      $ {\mathrm{C}{\mathrm{H}}_{4}+{\mathrm{H}}_{2}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{ }\rightleftharpoons \mathrm{ }3{\mathrm{H}}_{2}+\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}} $ ${ 8833.33\;\mathrm{*}\;\mathrm{exp}\left(-\dfrac{162}{\mathrm{R}\mathrm{T}}\right)\;\mathrm{*}\;\left(\left({\mathrm{p}}_{\mathrm{C}{\mathrm{H}}_{4}}\;\mathrm{*}\;{\mathrm{p}}_{{\mathrm{H}}_{2}\mathrm{O}}\right)-\dfrac{\left({\mathrm{p}}_{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}}\;\mathrm{*}\;{{\mathrm{p}}_{{\mathrm{H}}_{2}}}^{3}\right)}{{\mathrm{K}}_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{q}3}}\right)\;\mathrm{*}\;{\mathrm{\rho }}_{\mathrm{c}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{t}} }$

      Table 1. 

      Global reaction rate expressions for the three reactions of ethanol reforming.

    • Aspect ratio 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.0 2.0 2.5 5.0 10.0
      Sh 0.96 1.60 2.26 2.71 3.54 3.78 4.41 4.85

      Table 2. 

      Sherwood number as a function of aspect ratio.