Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 1863–1870

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Thermodynamic model for exergetic performance of a tubular SOFC module

Ali Volkan Akkaya a, *, Bahri Sahin b, Hasan Huseyin Erdem a
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Yildiz Technical University, 34349 Besiktas, Istanbul, Turkey
b
Department of Naval Architecture, Yildiz Technical University, 34349 Besiktas, Istanbul, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A tubular solid oxide fuel cell (TSOFC) module fed by methane is modelled and analyzed thermody-
Received 12 July 2007 namically from the exergy point of view in this paper. The model of TSOFC module consists of mixer, pre-
Accepted 17 November 2008 reformer, internal reforming fuel cell group, afterburner and internal pre-heater components. The model
Available online 21 December 2008
of the components forming module is given based on mass, energy and exergy balance equations. The
developed thermodynamic model is simulated, and the obtained performance characteristics are
Keywords:
compared and validated with the experimental data taken from the literature concerning TSOFC module.
Tubular SOFC
For exergetic performance analysis, the effects of operating variables such as current density, pressure,
Modelling
Simulation and fuel utilization factor on exergetic performances (module exergy efficiency, module exergetic
Exergetic performance performance coefficient, module exergy output and total exergy destruction rate, and components’
exergy efficiencies, exergy destruction rates) are investigated. From the analysis, it is determined that the
biggest exergy loss stems from exhaust gasses. Other important sources of exergy destruction involve
fuel cell group and afterburner. Consequently, the developed thermodynamic model is expected to
provide not only a convenient tool to determine the module exergetic performances and component
irreversibility but also an appropriate basis to design complex hybrid power generation plants.
Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction plenum. For that reason, thermodynamic interaction among these

At the recent times, the combined effects of the limited fossil
fuel sources and global warming have pointed out the requirement
of innovative energy generation systems to not only increase effi-
ciency and but also reduce harmful emissions. As a particular
relevance to this concern, solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC) have been
extensive research focus because of its high efficiency, environ-
mental friendliness, multi-fuel capabilities and being easy to site.
Tubular solid oxide fuel cell technology pioneered by Siemens-
Westinghouse Power Corporation (SWPC), achieved pre-commer-
cial stage, is more mature design than other types (planar and
monolithic geometry) and suitable for pressurizing [1–3]. In addi-
tion, high operating temperature (800–1000  C), allowing internal
reforming and producing exhaust gasses at high temperatures,
makes tubular solid oxide fuel cell (TSOFC) to promising candidate
technology for future clean power plant integrated with conven-
tional gas and steam turbines. The most crucial part for successful
analysis of the hybrid systems is TSOFC module because of occur-
ring chemical, electrochemical and thermodynamic processes
inside many components, for instance fuel cell stack, recuperator,
combustion plenum, ejector, pre-reforming plenum and recycle
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ90 0212 2597070; fax: þ90 0212 2616659.
E-mail address: aakkaya@yildiz.edu.tr (A.V. Akkaya).
components can affect TSOFC module and overall hybrid system
performance. This complex problem should be investigated in
detail by modelling and simulation studies for performance
improvement.
In the couple of years, several thermodynamic models have been
developed to study on tubular SOFC module performance. Some of
the important studies related to the analysis presented here can
start with Bessette and Wepfer [4], who developed a TSOFC module
model accounting for interaction among tubular cells and also
investigated the effects of fuel temperature and flow rate on module
exhaust temperature and general performances. Moreover, they
analyzed the part-load performance of TSOFC module in another
study [5]. Campanari [6] proposed a thermodynamic model,
involving all TSOFC module characteristics, for analyzing the effects
of operating conditions on module performance. However, cell
voltage in the model was found by empirical formulas based on
experimental data. Pangalis et al. [7] developed a thermodynamic
model of tubular SOFC stack for hybrid system analysis. Their results
showed that tubular SOFC stack could reach 56% efficiency at
1500 A/m2 value of current density. Lazzaretto et al. [8] presented
a tubular SOFC model with focus on electrochemistry performance
of the module and validated their simulation results with published
experimental test data and micro level based simulation results in
literature. Lemanski and Badur [9] carried out a numerical simula-
tion of tubular SOFC based zero-dimensional model and performed

0960-1481/$ – see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2008.11.017
1864 A.V. Akkaya et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 1863–1870

a parametric analysis taken into operating conditions. Zang et al.

[10] took an approach to build a tubular SOFC model by using
AspenPlusÔ software and performed sensitivity analyses of major
operating parameters, such as fuel utilization factor, current density
and steam–carbon ratio. Yi et al. [11] analyzed thermodynamically
the performance of 25 kW tubular SOFC generator fed by different
fuels such as natural gas, diesel reformate, biogas and coal syngas,
and they concluded that it was required significant operating
condition changes and/or system design changes in order to operate
well on this variety of fuels. Cali et al. [12] developed a model for
computer experimental analysis of 100 kW SOFC field unit perfor-
mance through a statistical methodology (2 k factorial experi-
ments). They determined the effect of air utilization factor, fuel
utilization factor, internal fuel and air preheating and anodic recy-
cling flow rate on stack electric power, thermal recovered power,
Fig. 1. Model diagram of tubular SOFC module.
single cell voltage, cell operative temperature, consumed fuel flow
and steam–carbon ratio.
All mentioned studies above are based on first law of thermo-
dynamics. However, energy analysis based on first law thermody-
mixture is distributed to the outside surface of the cells. At the same
namics does not give an explanation for the irreversibilities of the
time, air enters the module and passes a recuperator (HE) to
power generation systems. On the other hand, exergy analysis
increase its temperature. Subsequently, elevated temperature air
based on second law thermodynamics presents an effective tech-
enter the cathode side of each tubular cell and the electrochemical
nique for measuring and optimizing performance by reporting of
reaction occurs along the length of the cells with fuel on the outside
energy quality [13–15]. In literature, the criteria used in exergetic
and oxygen from the air on the inside. Non-recirculated gas mixture
performance analysis for power generation systems are usually
and excess air mix in the afterburner (AB) where combustion takes
exergy efficiency, exergy output and exergy destruction rate.
place to preheat the air entered to module. At last, the high
Recently, a new criterion called exergetic performance coefficient
temperature gas is exhausted from the module [16,17].
(EPC), defined as ratio of the exergy output to the loss rate of
For the performance analysis of TSOFC module, it is essential to
availability, was applied to a hydrogen fed fuel cell system [19,27].
develop mathematical model representing chemical, electro-
The EPC criterion gives information about total exergy destruction
chemical, and thermodynamic characteristics of each component of
in order to produce certain exergy output while exergy efficiency
the module. A zero-dimensional approach is used for the modelling
gives information about the necessary exergy quantity entering
of module components. The governing equations representing to
a power generation system. Therefore, performance evaluation by
all remarked components related to tubular SOFC module are given
considering all mentioned exergetic performance criteria together
in this section. For this aim, following assumptions are made in the
could provide an effective means of analyzing the thermodynamics
modelling:
of TSOFC module.
For these reasons, the objective of present study is to investigate
 Each component is considered as control volume.
the exergetic performance of a TSOFC module based on alternative
 Fuel cell module operates at steady state.
performance criteria (exergy efficiency, exergetic performance coef-
 Only hydrogen is electrochemically reacted.
ficient, exergy output and exergy destruction rate) for the change of
 All gases are treated as ideal gas.
various operating parameters such as current density, fuel utilization
 There is no gas leakage in the components.
factor and operating pressure. In this analysis, the developed model
 All components work in adiabatic conditions.
of methane fed tubular SOFC module contains its main characteristics
 Air is composed of 79% N2 and 21% O2.
such as pre/internal-reforming, anode gas recirculation, pre-heater,  Kinetic and potential terms in the energy and exergy balance
electrochemical and combustion reactions. The results of exergetic equations are negligible.
performance analysis based on the developed model will contribute  Ambient condition is considered as 25  C and 1.013 bar (1 atm).
some original information on the role of the considered operating
variables and will be beneficial in design of TSOFC module based
hybrid systems.
2.1. Mixer
2. Thermodynamic model of TSOFC module
The mixer is used as an ejector that recycles a part of anode
Schematic and flow arrangement diagram of TSOFC module
outlet gas to meet the required steam for reformation processes.
considered in this study is shown in Fig. 1. Model of TSOFC module
The amount of circulated gas stream can be determined with
consists of mixer, pre-reformer, internal reforming fuel cell group,
a certain steam–carbon ratio given as following:
afterburner, internal pre-heater and inverter components. This
concept is basically similar to 100 kW Siemens-Westinghouse n_ 6;H2 O
design under commercial development [16]. rSC ¼ (1)
_n2;CH4 þ n_ 2;CO
Operation of this module can be summarized as follows: Fuel
(methane) is fed and merged with recirculated anode gas compo- where rSC is steam–carbon ratio in which its value is crucial to avoid
sition in the mixer (M). Recirculation provides heat and steam to the carbon deposition in the porous electrode of cells. n_ is molar
reformation process occurred in the pre-reformer (PR). After pre- flow rate of a specific gas species. The subscript 6 and 2 represents
reformation, internal reforming process takes place, where the recycled stream and outlet stream, respectively.
methane is completely converted to hydrogen and carbon Fresh fuel mixes with the recirculated gas stream. Molar flow
monoxide before it contacts to the cells. This hydrogen rich gas is rate at the mixer output can be defined from molar mass balance
supplied to the anode side of each tubular cell. This reformed fuel equations:
 A.V. Akkaya et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 1863–1870 1865

n_ 2;CH4 ¼ n_ 1;CH4 þ n_ 6;CH4 (2a) n_ 3;H2 O ¼ n_ 2;H2 O  x_ r  y_ r (9e)

where the subscripts 2 and 3 denote pre-reformer inlet and outlet,

n_ 2;CO ¼ n_ 1;CO þ n_ 6;CO (2b) respectively. Reforming and shifting reactions are considered to
reach the thermodynamic equilibrium and these equilibrium
n_ 2;H2 ¼ n_ 1;H2 þ n_ 6;H2 (2c) constants (K) can be given as following:
n_ _ r þy_ r 3   
2;H2 þ3x n_ þx_ r y_ r
n_ 2;H2 O ¼ n_ 1;H2 O þ n_ 6;H2 O (2d) n_ 2;tot þ2x_ r
, n2;CO _ 2;tot þ2x_ r
ðDg r =RT3 Þ
Kr ¼ e ¼  n_ _r
  n_ 2;H O x_ r y_
 P2 (10a)
2;CH4 x
n_ 2;tot þ2x_ r
, n_ 2 þ2x_ r
2;tot r
Energy balance of the mixer can be expressed with following
n_   n_ 
equation: _ r þy_ r
2;H2 þ3x 2;CO þy _
, n_ 2þ2x_ r
n_ 2;tot þ2x_ r
Ks ¼ eðDgs =RT3 Þ
2;tot r
X  X  ¼ _  n_  (10b)
n2;CO þx_ r y_ r 2;H2 O x _ r y_ r
n_ 1;i h1;i þ n_ 6;i h6;i in  n_ 2;i h2;i out ¼ 0 (3) ,
n_ þ2x_2;tot r n_ þ2x_ 2;tot r
i i

where h denotes the specific molar enthalpy including formation where Dg is Gibbs energy change for related reactions, T3 is pre-
and sensible enthalpy. i refers to the species in the flow of each reformer outlet temperature assumed equal to the reaction
node of the system. temperature.
Exergy is considered as the sum of the physical and chemical Pre-reformer outlet temperature can be found from energy
exergy. For each node of the module, physical and chemical exergy balance equation given as:
can be defined as [13]: X  X 
n_ 2;i ,h2;i in  n_ 3;i ,h3;i out ¼ 0 (11)
X   
_ f ¼ i i
Ex n_ i hi  ho;i  To si  so;i (4)
i Exergy destruction rate and exergy efficiency for the pre-
reformer can be written as following equations:
X X 
_ c ¼
Ex n_ i xi ekim þ RTo xi lnðxi Þ (5)
i _ D;PR ¼ Ex
_  Ex
_
i i Ex 2 3 (12)

where Ex _ f and Ex
_ c represent the physical and chemical exergy, _
Ex
respectively. T is temperature, s is the specific molar entropy at hE;PR ¼ _ 3 (13)
Ex2
condition specified for the species, the subscript 0 is environment
conditions, R is universal gas constant, x is the molar fraction of the
gas i at the each node and ekim is standard chemical exergy taken 2.3. Fuel cell group
i
from literature [13].
The exergy destruction rate for the mixer can be expressed from Effluent gas mixture from pre-reformer contains mainly
exergy balance given as: methane, hydrogen, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and steam.
This gas mixture is reformed completely to hydrogen and carbon
_ D;M ¼ Ex
Ex _ þ Ex
_  Ex
_ (6) dioxide by the internal reforming reactions (Eq. (14a) and Eq.
1 6 2
(14b)). Simultaneously, hydrogen is used at the electrochemical
The exergy efficiency of mixer can be defined as following [14]. reaction (Eq. (14c)).

_
Ex CH4 D H2 O 4 CO D 3H2 ðreformingÞ (14a)
2
hE;M ¼ _ _
(7)
Ex1 þ Ex 6
CO D H2 O 4 CO2 D H2 ðshiftingÞ (14b)
2.2. Pre-reformer
H2 D 0:5O2 / H2 OðelectrochemicalÞ (14c)
In the pre-reformer, the thermal energy of the hot gas mixture
when x,_ y_ and z_ are taken into account as consumed molar flow
coming from the mixer is supposed to heat source for following
reactions: rates of methane, carbon monoxide and hydrogen, respectively, at
the fuel cell group, anode and cathode outlet gas flow rates can be
CH4 D H2 O 4 CO D 3H2 ðreformingÞ (8a) written from mass balance as below:

CO D H2 O 4 CO2 D H2 ðshiftingÞ (8b) n_ 4;CO ¼ n_ 3;CO þ x_  y_ (15a)

when x_ r and y_ r are considered as the consumed methane and

n_ 4;CO2 ¼ n_ 3;CO2 þ y_ (15b)
carbon monoxide flow rates respectively, the pre-reformer exit gas
composition can be determined from molar mass balance equa-
n_ 4;H2 ¼ n_ 3;H2 þ 3x_ þ y_  z_ (15c)
tions written as:

n_ 3;CH4 ¼ n_ 2;CH4  x_ r (9a) n_ 4;H2 O ¼ n_ 3;H2 O  x_  y_ þ z_ (15d)

n_ 3;CO ¼ n_ 2;CO þ x_ r  y_ r (9b) n_ 8;O2 ¼ n_ 7;O2  0:5z_ (15e)

n_ 3;CO2 ¼ n_ 2;CO2 þ y_ r (9c) n_ 8;N2 ¼ n_ 7;N2 (15f)

where the subscripts 7 and 8 refer to inlet and outlet of cathode

n_ 3;H2 ¼ n_ 2;H2 þ 3x_ r þ y_ r (9d) side, respectively while 3 and 4 refer to inlet and outlet of anode
1866 A.V. Akkaya et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 1863–1870

side. The variables x_ and y_ are calculated based on reaction equi- n_ 9;CO2 ¼ n_ 5;CO2 þ y_ ky (23b)
librium. Equilibrium constants of reforming and shifting reactions
(Kpr and Kps) can be written as:
n_ 9;H2 ¼ n_ 5;H2  z_ ky (23c)
n_  
_ z_ 3
_ y

3;H2 þ3xþ n_ _ y_
þx
n_ 2;tot þ2x_
, n_3;CO þ2x_ n_ 9;H2 O ¼ n_ 5;H2 O þ z_ ky (23d)
 P2
2;tot
Kpr ¼  n_ _
 n_ _ yþ _ z_
(16a)
3;CH4 x 2;H2 O x
n_ þ2x_
, n_ þ2x_
2;tot 2;tot
n_ 9;O2 ¼ n_ 8;O2  0:5z_ ky  0:5y_ ky (23e)
n_ 3;H
þ3xþ _ z_
_ y
  n_ _

2 3;CO þy
, n_ 2þ2x_
n_ 2;tot þ2x_ 2;tot n_ 9;N2 ¼ n_ 8;N2 (23f)
Kps ¼ _  n_ _ z_
_ yþ
 (16b)
n3;CO þx _ y_ 3;H2 O x
n_ þ2x_
, n_ þ2x_ where the subscripts 5 and 8 represent the inlet of afterburner
2;tot 2;tot

while 9 denotes the outlet.

Hydrogen amount reacted at the electrochemical reaction ðz_ Þ is
Afterburner exit enthalpy and temperature can be determined
written depending on fuel utilization factor given as:
from energy balance equation given as:
 
z_ ¼ Uf , 4,n_ 3;CH4 þ n_ 3;H2 þ n_ 3;CO (17) X  X 
n_ 5;i ,h5;i þ n_ 8;i ,h8;i in  n_ 9;i ,h9;i out ¼ 0 (24)
SOFC module power is given as following: i i

Exergy destruction rate and exergy efficiency for the afterburner

_
W FC ¼ N,Vc ,i (18) can be written as:
where N is tube number, i is current and Vc is cell voltage that can be
_
Ex _ _ _
calculated with the detailed electrochemical model given in the D;AB ¼ Ex5 þ Ex8  Ex9 (25)
authors’ previous studies [18,19]. This mentioned electrochemical
model calculates Nernst potential and ohmic, activation and _
Ex
9
concentration polarizations based on various parameters such as hE;AB ¼ _ _
(26)
Ex5 þ Ex 8
operating pressure, temperature, gas composition. The polarization
curve of the electrochemical model is validated with data provided
by Siemens-Westinghouse [20,21]. 2.5. Pre-heater
Outlet condition of fuel cell group is calculated using energy
balance equation given as: The heat produced from the afterburner is utilized to preheat
the air flow entering the TSOFC module. Since this process
X 
Q_ L  W
_ n_ 3;i h3;i þ n_ 7;i h7;i resembles duty of heat exchanger, a simple pre-heater model is
FC þ in
i taken into consideration. Heat exchanger effectiveness is used to
X  (19) determine the cathode inlet temperature as following:
 n_ 4;i ,h4;i þ n_ 8;i ,h8;i out
¼ 0
i
T7 ¼ T11 þ 3PH ðT9  T11 Þ (27)
where Q_ L is considered as the heat transfer rate from fuel cell group
The enthalpy and temperature of exhaust gas can be found from
to environment. The value of Q_ L is supposed to be zero because of
energy balance equation written as:
adiabatic conditions.
Exergy destruction rate of fuel cell group can be expressed from X  X 
n_ 9;i ,h9;i þ n_ 7;i ,h7;i in  n_ 10;i ,h10;i þ n_ 11;i ,h11;i out ¼ 0
exergy balance as following:
i i

_ _ _ _ _ _ (28)
Ex D;FC ¼ Ex3 þ Ex7  Ex4  Ex8  W FC (20)
Exergy destruction rate and exergy efficiency of internal pre-
Exergy efficiency of fuel cell group can be given as:
heater can be given as following equations:
_
W
FC _ D;PH ¼ Ex
Ex _ þ Ex
_ _ _
hE;FC ¼ _ (21) 9 11  Ex7  Ex10 (29)
_ 7 Þ  ðEx
ðEx3 þ Ex _ þ Ex
_ Þ
4 8

Table 1
2.4. Afterburner
Simulation input parameters.

Non-recirculated anodic gas stream and unused cathodic air Parameter Value

flow stream from SOFC group are combined and burned at after- Fuel composition (%) 100 CH4
Cell operating temperature ( C) 1000
burner. Combustion reactions occurred at the afterburner are given
Module operating pressure (bar) 1.08
as below: Average current density (A/m2) 1800
Cell active area (m2) 0.0834
H2 D 0:5O2 / H2 OðHydrogen combustionÞ (22a) Tubular cell number 1152
Air inlet temperature ( C) 630
Fuel inlet temperature ( C) 400
CO D 0:5O2 / CO2 ðCarbonmonoxide combustionÞ (22b) Afterburner efficiency (%) 98
Cell fuel utilization factor (%) 67.7
when z_ ky and y_ ky are taken into consideration as consumed
Total fuel utilization factor (%) 85
hydrogen and carbon monoxide flow rates respectively, afterburner Air utilization factor (%) 18
exit gas composition can be written based on molar mass balance Molar steam/carbon ratio (–) 2
Pressure loss in fuel cell group (%) 2
equations given as following:
Pressure loss in afterburner (%) 3
n_ 9;CO ¼ n_ 5;CO  y_ ky (23a) Inverter efficiency (%) 92.5
 A.V. Akkaya et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 1863–1870 1867

Table 2 Table 3
Comparison of model results with literature. Exergy efficiency and exergy destruction of TSOFC module and its components.

Parameter Literature [6,10,16,26] Simulation Components Exergy efficiency (%) Exergy destruction rate (kW)
Cell voltage (V) 0.682 0.678 Mixer 99.29 2.30
Gross DC power (kW) 118 117.2 Pre-reforming 99.58 1.35
Pre-reformer outlet temperature ( C) 550 550.5 Fuel cell group 81.99 23.80
Module exhaust gas temperature ( C) 847 846.5 Afterburner 94.35 13.36
Gross DC electrical efficiency (%) 53.25 55.4 Pre-heater 91.72 4.10
Gross AC electrical efficiency (%) 50 51.3
Module 48.78 44.91

Ex _
_  Ex Exergetic performance coefficient is defined as:
hE;PH ¼ _ 7 _ 11 (30)
Ex9  Ex10 _ tot
Ex
EPC ¼ (34)
_ D;Tot
Ex
2.6. Exergetic performance indices of TSOFC module
This criterion was introduced by Ust [22] and was applied to
Total exergy rate is equal to electrical power output of TSOFC different power generation systems using the approach of finite
module: time thermodynamics [23–25]. An analysis of power generation
systems based on this criterion will be beneficial for engineering
_ tot ¼ W
Ex _ (31)
FC decisions in terms of better performance and ecology.
Exergy efficiency of the tubular SOFC module can be written as:
3. Results and discussion
_ tot
Ex
hE ¼ (32) A simulator of the TSOFC module is written in a computer
n_ f ekim
f
program using the equations of the TSOFC module components
Total exergy destruction rate is sum of the destruction rate of all given in Section 2. The major characteristics of performance are
components given as follows: computed by means of this simulator. Table 1 shows the input
parameters relevant to simulation of the developed model based on
100 kW tubular SOFC module. The simulation results are compared
_ D;Tot ¼ Ex
Ex _ D;M þ Ex
_ D;PR þ Ex
_ _ _ _
D;FC þ ExD;AB þ ExD;PH þ Eexh (33) to the main characteristics concerning the TSOFC module

Fig. 2. Effect of operating pressure (P) on exergetic performances; a) module exergy efficiency (hE) and module exergetic performance coefficient (EPC), b) module total exergy
_
output ðEx _
SOFC Þ and module total exergy destruction rate ðExD;tot Þ, c) exergy efficiencies of components (PR – pre-reformer, M – mixer, AB – afterburner, pH – pre-heater, FC – fuel
cell group), d) exergy destruction rates of components.
1868 A.V. Akkaya et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 1863–1870
developed by SWPC. As seen from Table 2, this comparison shows
that the developed model of the tubular SOFC module can repre-
sent accurately its performance. Table 3 shows the exergy efficiency
and exergy destruction rate of TSOFC module and its components
for nominal simulation input parameters given in Table 1. It can be
deduced from Table 3 that exergy efficiency of fuel cell group is the
smallest of all components and its exergy destruction rate is the
biggest. This result is expected, as the major irreversibility sources
such as chemical and electrochemical reactions takes place inside
the fuel cell group. It can be concluded from the result that a special
attention must be given to fuel cell group in terms of exergetic
performance improvement. As well as fuel cell group, another
important sources of exergy destruction in the TSOFC module is
afterburner that the site of combustion reactions.
The effects of operating pressure (P), current density (j) and fuel
utilization factor (Uf) on exergetic performances of the tubular
SOFC module are also investigated and the obtained results are
given in Figs. 2–4. In this sensitivity analysis, module exhaust
temperature is taken as a constant parameter (847  C), therefore air
flow rate entering module is iteratively determined by changing air
utilization factor.
The variations of exergetic performances for the tubular SOFC
module with respect to operating pressure are investigated, and the
results are given in Fig. 2. We see from Fig. 2a that increasing
pressure results in exergy efficiency (hE) increase while it causes to
decrease the exergetic performance coefficient (EPC). The effect of
the operating pressure on the total exergy output ðEx _
SOFC Þ and total
exergy destruction rate ðEx _ D;tot Þ is shown in Fig. 2b. It can be
observed from this figure that both exergy output and total exergy
destruction rate increase when operating pressure is elevated. In
Fig. 3. Effect of current density (j) on exergetic performances; a) module exergy efficiency (hE) and module exergetic performance coefficient (EPC), b) module total exergy output
_
ðEx _
SOFC Þ and module total exergy destruction rate ðExD;tot Þ, c) exergy efficiencies of components (PR – pre-reformer, M – mixer, AB – afterburner, pH – pre-heater, FC – fuel cell
group), d) exergy destruction rates of components.
this context, increasing total exergy destruction rate more than
total exergy output makes clear the reason of the decline trend of
the ECP. The variations of component exergy efficiencies and their
exergy destruction rates with respect to operating pressure are
shown in Fig. 2c and d. From observation of these figures one can
see that there is no considerably influence of operating pressure
alteration on component exergy efficiency and their exergy
destruction rates except fuel cell group. Furthermore, it is under-
stood that the biggest exergy loss is caused by exhaust gas flow, and
increasing pressure makes the exergy loss to increase considerably.
This is because air flow rate increases in order to meet given
constant exhaust temperature (847  C) when operating pressure
goes up.
The variations of the exergetic performance with respect to
current density are summarized in the plots presented in Fig. 3a–d.
It can be seen from Fig. 3a that exergy efficiency and exergetic
performance coefficient (EPC) reduces when current density
increases. It can be noted that when current density value
approaches the limiting current density (6500 A/m2), the module
exergy efficiency and exergetic performance coefficient drop
rapidly to zero due to growing voltage losses quickly. The variations
of exergy output and total exergy destruction rate of the module
with respect to current density are illustrated in Fig. 3b. As current
density increases, exergy output increases firstly and has
a maximum value (190 kW) at 5000 A/m2 value of current density,
after maximum condition, the value of exergy output reduces
instantly and becomes zero at limiting current density. The module
exergy output (equal to power output) increases until the current
density value of 5000 A/m2 owing to the fact that power
augmentation effect of current density dominates the effects of
 A.V. Akkaya et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 1863–1870
Fig. 4. Effect of fuel utilization factor (Uf) on exergetic performances; a) module exergy efficiency (hE) and module exergetic performance coefficient (EPC), b) module total exergy
_
output ðEx _
SOFC Þ and module total exergy destruction rate ðExD;tot Þ, c) exergy efficiencies of components (PR – pre-reformer, M – mixer, AB – afterburner, pH – pre-heater, FC – fuel
cell group), d) exergy destruction rates of components.
voltage losses. After maximum exergy output conditions, the
exergy output reduces because of the fact that voltage loss effects of
current density become more dominant. It is also seen from Fig. 3a–
b that exergy efficiency and EPC values at maximum exergy output
condition are 32% and 0.22, respectively. From these results, it can
be said that current density should be lower than 5000 A/m2 in
terms of exergetic performance. The variations of component
exergy efficiencies and exergy destruction rates with respect to
current density are exemplified in Fig. 3c–d. From Fig. 3c, it can be
observed that although increasing current density results in
a reduction of fuel cell group’s exergy efficiency, the variations in
current density have no significant effects on exergy efficiencies of
other components. We can observe from Fig. 3d that exergy
destruction rates of all components increases with current density
increase. It is also seen that the most exergy loss is arisen from the
exhaust gases with the increasing current density.
The effects of fuel utilization factor on the exergetic perfor-
mances of tubular SOFC module are examined and the results are
given in Fig. 4. It can be clearly seen from Fig. 4a that exergy effi-
ciency and exergetic performance coefficient of TSOFC module have
maximum values (hE ¼ 48%, EPC ¼ 0.50) at the same fuel utilization
factor (Uf ¼ 0.79). The variations of module exergy output and total
exergy destruction rate in terms of fuel utilization factor are shown
in Fig. 4b. As seen from this figure, total exergy output decreases
with the increasing fuel utilization factor. It should be noted that
the decrease in higher fuel utilization factor is more rapid. The
reason is that increasing fuel utilization factor results in a reduction
of fuel flow rate entering module and an increase of voltage losses
due to polarizations. We can also see from Fig. 4b that total exergy
destruction rate reduces up to a certain value of fuel utilization
1869
factor and passes a minimum value, after that increases rapidly. The
value of fuel utilization factor minimizing the total exergy
destruction rate is about 0.88. The variations of exergy efficiencies
and exergy destruction for the module components with respect to
fuel utilization factor are depicted in Fig. 4c and d. It can be seen
from Fig. 4c that exergy efficiency of afterburner increases while
exergy efficiency of fuel cell group decreases with increasing fuel
utilization factor. It can be noted that other components’ exergy
efficiencies are not affected significantly by change of fuel utiliza-
tion factor. We can observe from Fig. 4d that exergy destruction rate
of fuel cell group increases, whereas exergy destruction rate
afterburner decreases with increasing fuel utilization factor. The
main reason is that increasing fuel utilization factor reduces cell
voltage, thus exergy destruction of fuel cell group increases. On the
other side, increasing fuel utilization factor causes lower hydrogen
amount in the afterburner, therefore destruction of afterburner
increases. As seen also from this figure that the biggest exergy
losses result from the exhaust gasses, and this exergy loss passes
a minimum at 0.88 value of fuel utilization factor.
4. Conclusion
In this study, a tubular SOFC module fed by methane has been
modelled thermodynamically. The presented comparative simu-
lation results indicate that the developed model for tubular SOFC
module is an effective simulator. An exergetic performance anal-
ysis based on the developed thermodynamic model has been
carried out. All considered exergetic performances for the TSOFC
module are investigated in a very wide range of operation
parameter such as effects of pressure, current density and fuel
1870 A.V. Akkaya et al. / Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 1863–1870
utilization factor. It can be concluded from the results of the
analysis that most of the exergy entering the TSOFC module is
converted to the product electricity and rejected from module as
heat of exhaust gasses. A relatively smaller quantity is lost within
module components. Among the components, the most important
exergy destruction rates are associated with fuel cell group and
afterburner, respectively. Note that the heat rejected from the
module has significant exergy amount due to high exhaust
temperature, and can be therefore beneficial for cogeneration or
hybrid application. As a future study, this developed model of the
SOFC module can be integrated to hybrid system for exergy and
exergoeconomic analysis. As a result, the developed model may
provide a basis for determination the optimal design and oper-
ating conditions in terms of exergetic methodology for SOFC based
systems.
References
[1] Larminie J, Dicks A. Fuel cell system explained. New York: Wiley & Sons Ltd;
2004.
[2] Singhal SC, Kendal K. High temperature solid oxide fuel cells: fundamental,
design and applications. UK: Elsevier; 2004.
[3] Singhal SC. Advances in solid oxide fuel cell technology. Solid State Ionics
2000;135:305–13.
[4] Bessette NF, Wepfer WJ. A mathematical model of a tubular solid oxide fuel
cell. Journal of Energy Research Technology 1995;117:43–9.
[5] Bessette NF, Wepfer WJ. Prediction on-design and off-design performance of
a solid oxide fuel cell power module. Energy Conversion and Management
1996;37(3):281–93.
[6] Campanari S. Thermodynamic model and parametric analysis of a tubular
SOFC module. Journal of Power Sources 2001;92:26–34.
[7] Pangalis MG, Martinez-Botas RF, Brandon NP. Integration of solid oxide fuel
cell into gas turbine power generation cycles. Part 1: fuel cell thermodynamic
modelling. Proceeding of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A
Journal of Power and Energy 2002;216(2):129–44.
[8] Lazzaretto A, Toffolo A, Zanon F. Parameter setting for a tubular SOFC simu-
lation model. Transaction of ASME. Journal of Energy Resources Technology
2004;126:40–6.
[9] Lemanski M, Badur J. Parametrical analysis of a tubular pressurized SOFC.
Archives of Thermodynamics 2004;25:53–72.
[10] Zang W, Croiset E, Douglas PL, Fowler MW, Entchev E. Simulation of a tubular
solid oxide fuel cell stack using AspenPlusÔ unit operation models. Energy
Conversion and Management 2005;46:181–96.
[11] Yaofan Y, Rao AD, Brouwer J, Samuelsen GS. Fuel flexibility study of an integrated
25 kW SOFC reformer system. Journal of Power Sources 2005;144:67–76.
[12] Cali M, Santarelli MGL, Leone P. Computer experimental analysis of the CHP
performance of a 100 kWe SOFC field unit by a factorial design. Journal of
Power Sources 2006;156(2):400–13.
[13] Kotas TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. Malabar, USA: Krieger
Publishing Company; 1995.
[14] Bejan A, Tsatsaronis G, Moran M. Thermal design and optimization. New York:
Wiley; 1995.
[15] Dincer I, Rosen MA. Exergy as a driver for achieving sustainability. Interna-
tional Journal of Green Energy 2004;1:1–19.
[16] George RA. Status of tubular SOFC field unit demonstrations. Journal of Power
Sources 2000;186:134–9.
[17] Song TW, Sohn JL, Kim JH, Kim TS, Ro ST, Suzuki K. Performance analysis of
a tubular solid oxide fuel cell/micro gas turbine hybrid power system based on
a quasi-two dimensional model. Journal of Power Sources 2005;142:30–42.
[18] Akkaya AV. Electrochemical model for performance analysis of a tubular SOFC.
International Journal of Energy Research 2007;31:79–98.
[19] Akkaya AV, Sahin B, Erdem HH. Exergetic performance analysis of a simple fuel
cell system. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2007;32(17):4600–9.
[20] EG&G Services Parsons Inc. Fuel cell handbook. 6th ed. West Virginia: Science
Applications Int. Corp. US Department of Energy, National Energy Technology
Laboratory; 2002.
[21] Williams MC, Strakey JP, Singhal SC. U.S. distributed generation fuel cell
program. Journal of Power Sources 2004;131:79–85.
[22] Ust Y. Ecological performance analysis and optimization of power generation
systems, PhD thesis. Turkey: Yildiz Technical University; 2005.
[23] Ust Y, Sahin B, Sogut OS. Performance analysis and optimization of an irre-
versible dual cycle based on ecological coefficient of performance criterion.
Applied Energy 2005;82:23–39.
[24] Ust Y, Sahin B, Kodal A, Akcay IH. Ecological coefficient of performance anal-
ysis and optimization of an irreversible regenerative-Brayton heat engine.
Applied Energy 2006;83(6):558–72.
[25] Ust Y, Sahin B, Kodal A. Performance analysis of an irreversible Brayton heat
engine based on ecological coefficient of performance criterion. International
Journal of Thermal Sciences 2006;45(1):94–101.
[26] Cali M, Santarelli MGL, Leone P. Design of experiments for fitting regression
models on the tubular KOFC CHP 100 kWe: screening test, response surface
analysis and optimization. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy
2007;32:343–58.
[27] Akkaya AV. Performance analysis of solid oxide fuel cell based energy gener-
ation systems with alternative criteria, PhD thesis. Turkey: Yildiz Technical
University; 2007.