Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of surface tension on the critical current density at sulfuric acid electrolysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Heat and Mass Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The hydrogen evolving system such as the water electrolysis generates hydrogen gas at the cathode surface via electrochemical reaction. The current density increases as the cell potential increases with the increased hydrogen generation rate. However, the current density is limited by the formation of hydrogen film on the surface, similar to the critical heat flux (CHF) condition, which is known as critical current density (CCD). Unlike to the boiling system, the influences of hydrodynamic parameters on the CCD is hardly investigated. The present work is motivated by the fact that the CHF is affected by the surface tension. In the present work, the water electrolysis of sulfuric-acid aqueous solution was used to measure the CCD varying the surface tension via surfactant (CTAB). Comparative analyses were performed with the existing results of the boiling system. Both the CCD and hydrogen bubble diameter decreased as the surface tension decreased, similar to those of the boiling system. To investigate relationship between the CCD and the hydrogen bubble diameter, the bubble velocity was estimated by the measured CCD, which is affected by the bubble diameter, the drag coefficient and gas area fraction. Using those parameters, the CCD is predicted within 20% error. The result implies that the influence of surface tension on the CCD is similar to that on the CHF.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

A :

Surface area [m2]

A R :

Gas area fraction

C :

Concentration of surfactant in bulk liquid [ppm]

C d :

Drag coefficient

D :

Bubble diameter [mm]

F :

Faraday constant [C/mol]

g :

Acceleration of gravity [m/s2]

h fg :

Latent heat [kJ/kg]

I˝ :

Current density [A/m2]

I˝ CCD :

Critical current density [A/m2]

m :

Molar mass [mol/kg]

q" :

Heat flux [kW/m2]

q" CHF :

Critical heat flux [kW/m2]

R a :

Roughness average [μm]

Re :

Reynolds number

S :

Electric conductance [Ω−1]

v :

Bubble velocity [m/s]

v g :

Critical gas velocity [m/s]

v s :

Superficial velocity [m/s

ρ :

Density [kg/m3

g :

Gas

l :

Liquid

exp :

Experimental measurement

pred :

Prediction value

b :

Bubble

hex :

Hexagonal

References

  1. Liang G, Mudawar I (2018) Pool boiling critical heat flux (CHF) – Part 1: Review of mechanisms, models, and correlations. Int J Heat Mass Transf 117:1352–1367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2017.09.134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. O’Hanley H, Coyle C, Buongiorno J, McKrell T, Hu LW, Rubner M (2013) Separate effects of surface roughness, wettability and porosity on the boiling critical heat flux. Appl Phys Lett 103:024102. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4813450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Zuber N (1959) Hydrodynamic aspects of boiling heat transfer. Dissertation, University of California

  4. Haramura Y, Katto Y (1983) A new hydrodynamic model of critical heat flux, applicable widely to both pool and forced convective boiling on submerged bodies in saturated liquids. Int J Heat Mass Transf 117:389–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/0017-9310(83)90043-1

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Raza MQ, Kumar N, Raj R (2018) Wettability-independent critical heat flux during boiling crisis in foaming solutions. Int J Heat Mass Transf 126:567–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2018.05.062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dolatabadi S, Fattahi M, Nabati M (2021) Solid state dispersion and hydrothermal synthesis, characterization and evaluations of TiO2 /ZnO nanostructures for degradation of Rhodamine B. 231:425–435. https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2021.27496

  7. Garmroudi A, Kheirollahi M, Mousavi SA, Fattahi M (2020) Effects of Graphene oxide/TiO2 nanocomposite, graphene oxide nanosheets and Cedr extraction solution on IFT reduction and ultimate oil recovery from a carbonate rock. J Petroleum. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petlm.2020.10.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sillen CWMP, Barendrecht E, Janssen LJJ, Van Stralen SJD (1982) Gas bubble behaviour during water electrolysis. Int J Hydrog Energy 7:577–587. https://doi.org/10.1016/0360-3199(82)90038-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Vogt H, Aras I, Balzer RJ (2004) The limits of the analogy between boiling and gas evolution at electrodes. Int J Heat Mass Transf 47:787–795. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2003.07.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gangal U, Srivastava M, Sen Gupta SK (2009) Mechanism of the Breakdown of Normal Electrolysis and the Transition to Contact Glow Discharge Electrolysis. J Electrochem Soc 156:131–136. https://doi.org/10.1149/1.3186023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Daring HE (1964) Conductivity of sulfuric acid solutions. J Chem Eng Data 9:421–426. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.1c09622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Petkova B, Tcholakova S, Chenkova M, Golemanov K, Denkov N, Thorley D, Stoyanov S (2020) Foamability of aqueous solutions: Role of surfactant type and concentration. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 276:102084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2019.102084

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Owens DK, Wendt RC (1969) Estimation of the surface free energy of polymers. J Appl Polym Sci 13:1741–1747. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.1969.070130815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Coleman HW, Steele WG (1999) Experimentation and uncertainty analysis for engineers. John Wiley & Son Inc., Canada

    Google Scholar 

  15. Raza MQ, Kumar N, Raj R (2016) Surfactants for Bubble Removal against Buoyancy. Sci Rep 6:19113. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep19113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Andrianov A, Farajzadeh R, Mahmoodi Nick M, Talanana M, Zitha PLJ (2012) Immiscible foam for enhancing oil recovery: bulk and porous media experiments. Ind Eng Chem Res 51:2214–2226. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie201872v

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ferri JK, Stebe KL (2000) Which surfactants reduce surface tension faster? A scaling argument for diffusion-controlled adsorption. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 85:61–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8686(99)00027-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kugou N, Ishida K, Yoshida A (2003) Experimental study on motion of air bubbles in seawater (terminal velocity and drug coefficient of air bubble rising in seawater). WIT Transactions on the Built Environment 68:145–158. https://doi.org/10.2495/MT030141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Yang G, Zhang H, Luo J, Wang T (2018) Drag force of bubble swarms and numerical simulations of a bubble column with a CFD-PBM coupled model. Chem Eng Sci 192:714–724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2018.07.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hassan NMS, Khan MMK, Rasul MG (2008) A Study of Bubble Trajectory and Drag Co-efficient in Water and Non-Newtonian Fluids. Wseas transactions on fluid mechanics 3:261–270

    Google Scholar 

  21. Tao F, Ning S, Zhang B, Jin H, He G (2019) Simulation study on gas holdup of large and small bubbles in a high pressure gas–liquid bubble column. Processes 7:594. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr7090594

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was sponsored by the Ministry of Science and ICT and was supported by Nuclear Research & Development program grant funded by the National Research Foundation (NRF) (Grant code: 2017M2A8A4015283).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyung Hee University, Deogyeong-daero Giheung-gu Yongin-si Gyeonggi-do, 17104, Republic of Korea

    Dong-Hyuk Park, Hae-Kyun Park & Bum-Jin Chung

Authors
  1. Dong-Hyuk Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hae-Kyun Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bum-Jin Chung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bum-Jin Chung.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Park, DH., Park, HK. & Chung, BJ. Influence of surface tension on the critical current density at sulfuric acid electrolysis. Heat Mass Transfer 58, 2097–2105 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-022-03230-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-022-03230-1

Search

Navigation