Preparation and characterization of a redox-stable Pr0.4Sr0.6Fe0.875Mo0.125O3-δ material as a novel symmetrical electrode for solid oxide cell application

Advanced Ru‐Infiltrated Perovskite Oxide Electrodes for Boosting the Performance of Syngas Fueled Solid Oxide Fuel Cell

“…According to the literature previously reported, [28,30,[32][33][34][35] the highest area was recorded in P 2 , which was located in the frequency range 1-10 2 Hz, indicating that resistance for gas conversion and diffusion sub-step was capable of determining the electrode reaction. It is also notable that the area closed by P 2 increased with increasing the pre-sintering temperature, revealing the strong pre-sintering temperature correlation of P2 sub-step but the weak correlation of the other two sub-steps (P1 and P3) for SFM-SDC electrodes.…”

“…The activation energy was greatly reduced from 1.19±0.04 eV for bare SFM‐SDC electrode to 0.87±0.22 eV for the Ru infiltrated SFM‐SDC. The largely decreased activation energy is possibly ascribed to more active electrochemical reaction sites for the gas oxidation after Ru infiltration, suggesting that the infiltrated Ru nanocatalysts can effectively lower the energy barrier for hydrogen oxidation reaction [33,39] . By referring the research results previously reported with closely related systems, [40–42] the electrode reaction on bare SFM‐SDC anodes is limited by the adsorption, dissociation and ionization of hydrogen in the surface of the electrodes, whose activation energy normally accounts for 80–90 % of the entire R p (Figure 2c).…”

“…The largely decreased activation energy is possibly ascribed to more active electrochemical reaction sites for the gas oxidation after Ru infiltration, suggesting that the infiltrated Ru nanocatalysts can effectively lower the energy barrier for hydrogen oxidation reaction. [33,39] By referring the research results previously reported with closely related systems, [40][41][42] the electrode reaction on bare SFM-SDC anodes is limited by the adsorption, dissociation and ionization of hydrogen in the surface of the electrodes, whose activation energy normally accounts for 80-90 % of the entire R p (Figure 2c). The above-achieved experimental results strongly ensured that Ru nanocatalysts with good electrocatalytic activity can effectively boost the electrochemical performance of the SFM-SDC electrodes.…”

“…For a better perception, the EIS data were also analyzed by the distribution of relaxation time (DRT) technique to distinguish the different resistance contributions as well as the rate-limiting steps of the electrode reaction process. [32][33][34][35] It is worthy to point out that the SFM-SDC electrode pre-sintered at 1000 °C was not well-connected with the LSGM electrolyte and was not suitable for SOFC application. Therefore, only the electrodes pre-sintered at 1050, 1100, and 1150 °C were chosen for further study.…”

“…The above-achieved experimental results strongly ensured that Ru nanocatalysts with good electrocatalytic activity can effectively boost the electrochemical performance of the SFM-SDC electrodes. [33,39,43] Figure 3c presents the corresponding DRT analysis results at 800 °C to more clearly identify the rate-determining sub-steps, where the R p for a sub-step is represented by a typical DRT peak. Compared to the bare electrode, all these three characteristic peaks for the infiltrated one, especially P 2 peak corresponding to gas adsorption and conversion sub-step, were largely lowered, indicating the greatly decreased polarization resistance for P2 sub-process and confirming that the electrode reaction process is effectively accelerated by Ru infiltration.…”