There are many durability challenges that need to be overcome for the successful commercialization of automotive PEMFCs such as load cycling, cold-start, start-up shut-down, and dry operation/durability of membranes. The catalyst layer which is ~10um thick porous layer (composed of Pt/C, ionomer) applied to a proton conducting membrane is the heart of the fuel cell.  Power is generated, water and heat are produced and hydrogen and oxygen consumed in this thin layer. The durability of this layer in the MEA is one of the primary challenges facing PEMFCs.  In order to characterize, understand and find solutions to mitigate the degradation of the catalyst layer, accurate and robust in-situ diagnostic techniques are necessary.  Some of the most fundamental parameters that can be used as a measure and benchmark of the degradation rate include the change in electrochemical area (ECA, m²/g), specific activity (i_s, uA/cm²) and mass activity (i_m, mA/mg). In this paper, we report on the significant effect of PtO_x surface coverage on the measured values of fundamental parameters such as surface area, specific activity and mass activity.  Further, the effect of voltage cycling parameters such as cycle profile, and operating conditions on the degradation of the catalyst layer of membrane electrode assemblies (MEAs) in subscale fuel cells are reported using our proposed measurement methods. There exists a wide range of values of intrinsic ORR parameters of specific activity (i_s), mass activity (i_m) and exchange current density (i₀) as measured in both liquid electrolyte cells using rotating disc electrodes (RDE), as well as in-situ, in MEAs of subscale single cells.^1,2  Some of the variations can be attributed to the different operating conditions under which these parameters have been measured and the difficulty in converting them to a set of standard conditions.  The conversion to standard conditions (such as 100 kPa, 80^oC) depends on the accurate knowledge of the effect of temperature on kinetics and the reaction order ‘m' for the effect of partial pressure.  Besides errors induced by these factors, another important factor often ignored is the effect of pre-conditioning (immediate history) of the MEA in the steps prior to measurement of activity (typically @ 0.90V).  The pre-conditioning step can affect the oxide coverage of Pt depending on whether the step was a hold at high potentials above 0.80V or held at potentials below 0.70V in a regime where the surface is predominantly free of oxides.  In our work, we will report for the first time on the effects of such pre-conditioining steps on the measured specific and mass activity of the catalyst. Using the reproducible diagnostic measurement techniques thus developed, we apply them to the measurement of potential cyclic durability of MEAs in subscale fuel cells.  Under normal automotive operation load cycles in the range between idling and peak load where the voltage range is about 0.95-0.60V is common.  This range involves a change in Pt surface from one covered with oxides to one that is not and thus is also of interest in terms of fundamental understanding of Pt and PtO_x dissoultion.  Bulk Pt as well as Pt/C dissolution is known to take place when held at high potentials.^3-6  In addition, the severe effects of potential cycling on Pt has been the subject of several reports in recent literature.^7-11  In this study, we investigate and compare the effect of cycle profile under different operating conditions and report on the degradation of surface area (ECA) as well as specific and mass activity over ~15,000 cycles, besides discussing the possible mechanisms for the degradation.  

References

1) H. A. Gasteiger, S. S. Kocha, B. Sompalli, and F. T. Wagner, Appl. Catal., B,: Environmental 56 (2005) 9–35.

2) S.S. Kocha, Principles of MEA preparation, in: W. Vielstich, A.Lamm, H. Gasteiger (Eds.), Handbook of Fuel Cells – Fundamentals,Technology and Applications, vol. 3, Wiley, Chichester, UK, 2003, p.538 (Chapter 43).

3) M. Pourbaix. Atlas of Electrochemical Equilibria in Aqueous Solutions, Pergamon Press, Oxford 1966.

4) P. Bindra, S. J. Clouser, and E. Yeager, J. Electrochem. Soc. 126, 1631 1979.

5) P. J. Ferreira, G. J. Ia O', Y. Shao-Horn, D. Morgan, R. Makharia, S. Kocha, and H.A. Gasteiger, J. Electrochem. Soc., 152, A2256 2005

6) X. Wang, R. Kumar, and D. J. Myers Electrochemical and Solid-State Letters, 9 5

7) K. Kinoshita, J. T. Lundquist, and P. Stonehart, J. Electroanal. Chem. 48, 157 1973.

8) T. Patterson, in Fuel Cell Technology Topical Conference Proceedings, G. J. Igweand D. Mah, Editors, p. 313, AIChE Spring National Meeting, New York 2002.

9) P. Yu, M. Pemberton, and P. Plasse, J. Power Sources 144, 11 2005.

10) J. Aragane, H. Urushibata, and T. Murahashi, J. Appl. Electrochem. 26, 147 1996.

11) Shigenori Mitsushima, Shuya Kawahara, Ken-ichiro Ota, and Nobuyuki Kamiya J. Electrochem. Soc, 154 2 B153-B158 2007.