The improvement herein relates to cross sectional flow area of vertical, two-phase fuel cell coolant exit outlet manifolds which increases from the bottom of the outlet manifold to the top thereof.
As shown in
It is noted, for the following discussions, that because the top cooler 18 and bottom cooler 20 are near cool ambient, with fuel cells on only one side, they do not require the same mass flow as the intermediate coolers 19, and may provide adequate cooling without producing any steam at all. Because the heat of vaporization is more effective than conduction with coolant water, the interior coolers 19 will cool the fuel cells 15 in a most efficient fashion if the mass flow is controlled so that heating of the coolant by the normal operation of the fuel cells 15 will produce a small amount of steam. The amount of steam is targeted to be that which is sufficient for hydrocarbon feed reformation to produce fuel gas with a high hydrogen concentration. In the illustrative example, the amount of steam may be on the order of 3 mass percent to 10 mass percent.
In normal, electric power producing operation of a liquid electrolyte fuel cell stack, the electrolyte is evaporated into the reactant gas streams, and is condensed out of the reactant gas streams near the gas stream exits. This process is dependent upon the temperature of the fuel cells. This in turn requires careful temperature control of all of the coolant for all the cells in a stack. All of the processes in a liquid electrolyte fuel cell are dependent to various degrees on the temperature of the cell, as well as the temperature differential from the inlet of the cell to the outlet of the cell. Since the catalytic reaction of the reactants in the fuel cells generate significant heat, adequate cooling of each fuel cell is required. Fuel cell efficiency and life expectancy of the fuel cell are dependent upon fuel cell temperature as well. Coolant maldistribution will of course result in unwanted variation of fuel cell temperatures from a desired norm.
If there is significant mass flow through the coolers 18, resulting in significant pressure drops, such as on the order of 15 psig, the mass flow and therefore the coolant temperature is easily controlled by adjustment of the flow characteristics through the tubes 29. For instance, minor restrictions can reduce mass flow in some coolers 19 to thereby increase mass flow in other coolers and adjust pressure drops. However, in coolers having low mass flow, such as on the order of 70 lb/hr to 80 lb/hr, the pressure drop across the cooler may be on the order of 5 psig 8 psig. It has been found that adjustments to the tubes 29 is not effective in standardizing the coolant flow in and temperature of the cooler plates 18.
If the mass flow were all single phase (just water, and no steam), the pressure differential across the top cooler 18 would be the same as the pressure differential across the bottom cooler 20, as shown in
With a relatively large outlet manifold cross sectional area (on the order of the same cross sectional area of the inlet manifold), the lower mass of the two-phase flow in the outlet manifold results in the pressure differential between the bottom of the manifold and the top of the manifold being less than the pressure differential of the water between the bottom of the inlet manifold and the top of the inlet manifold, as is illustrated in
The improvement herein derives from the discovery that with two-phase flow, the mass flow of coolant in a vertical manifold is not only dependent on the gravity head pressure but is also dependent on the pressure drop due to frictional losses. At the bottom of the outlet manifold 27, where the mass flow is relatively small (being from one cooler only) and there is little or no steam, the frictional pressure drop due to flow of coolant is relatively small. But the pressure drop due to frictional losses near the top of the coolant outlet manifold 27 is higher. There is a gradient of frictional pressure loss that increases from the bottom of the coolant outlet manifold 27 to the top of the coolant outlet manifold 27, but this is not necessarily a linear gradient.
In order to provide additional pressure gradient in the outlet manifold, the cross section of the manifold may be selected so that the pressure drop resulting from the frictional pressure loss due to the flow in the outlet manifold, from the bottom of the manifold toward the top of the manifold, will approximate the difference between the exit pressure shown in
Accordingly, the pressure drop across cooler plates and therefore the mass flow of coolant in the cooler plates of a stack are all brought within an acceptable tolerance of a desired norm as illustrated by the dotted line to the left in
The improvement may also be practiced in a coolant outlet manifold which is of a uniform cross sectional flow area, but containing an insert which is larger at the bottom and smaller at the top. The insert may have a continuous change in cross sectional flow area or be stepwise; the insert may be linear or non-linear in its incremental size, and it may be rotund. The inserts may be trianguloids, cones or conoids, pyramids, pyramoids or of other shapes. The decrease in cross sectional area of such inserts may be continuous or it may decrease in steps; the decrease may be linear or non-linear; it may be rotund.
The invention corrects pressure differences resulting from frictional losses due to the steam in the flow of outlet coolant, which in turn provides substantially identical pressure drops across all of the fuel cells, from about the bottom to about the top, thereby providing mass flow and temperature within the cooler plates which are all within an acceptable tolerance of a desired norm.
One manner of implementing the improvement herein is illustrated in
Another embodiment of the invention is illustrated in
Variations on the embodiment of
A further improvement herein relates to further discoveries concerning the frictional pressure losses in a two-phase coolant outlet manifold for a liquid electrolyte fuel cell. The frictional pressure losses from the two-phase flow do not increase linearly along the height of the coolant exit manifold, but the rise in frictional pressure losses has a lower slope near the bottom of the coolant outlet manifold and a somewhat steeper slope near the top of the coolant outlet manifold. That is to say, a plot of frictional pressure losses as a function of height of the coolant exit manifold is not linear, but is slightly concave in the direction of higher pressure. Therefore, the improvement may be implemented to achieve even greater consistency of mass flow among all of the cooler plates by using a rotund trianguloid, conoid or pyramid. A rotund conoid 51, for instance, is shown in
Other shapes of manifolds and manifold inserts may be used within the purview of the improvement herein. For instance, the embodiment of
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/US07/16354 | 7/18/2007 | WO | 00 | 1/14/2010 |