Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
This study applies four different types of machine learning methods to model the power
performance behaviour of a tubular solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC) under different
operating conditions. The corresponding machine learning methods are: artificial neural
network (ANN), fuzzy inference system (FIS), support vector machine (SVM), and
genetic programming (GP). By using four types of inputs of the SOFC operation: i.e.
load current, fuel utilization, inlet air temperature, and air molar flow rate, the task of
the corresponding machine learning methods is to predict the stack voltage and outlet
temperature values of the corresponding SOFC operation. 1000 input-output data
pairings that were generated from the simulations of a physical tubular SOFC model
under various operating conditions were used to train the corresponding machine
learning models. It was found out from this study that ANN method has slightly better
performance in modelling the power performance behaviour of the corresponding SOFC
system under various operating conditions.
Keywords: Solid oxide fuel cells; Machine learning methods; Power performance
prediction
1. Introduction
Solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC) are expected to play a significant role in helping to meet
the ever-increasing demands for cleaner supply energy in the near future (Stambouli,
2011). Already, SOFCs have been proposed as a potential power source for distributed
and stationary power plants and also mobile applications. The advantages of SOFCs are
their high efficiency, modularity, low noise and low environmental pollution. However,
certain challenges, including the optimum operation of the SOFC stacks, need to be
resolved before the technology can be adopted for the real-world applications.
Moreover, this issue will also take into considerations the unique nature of the SOFC
operating phenomena. Clearly, the requirement to satisfy all these challenges will
require the development of an effective control strategy that is specifically tailored to
the SOFC operation. Model-based control strategies that rely on the availability of good
modeling descriptions of the SOFC phenomena are expected to play a crucial role in
this regard.
Machine learning has shown its great utility in modeling complex phenomena in
chemical processes. This utility has brought forward its potential for applications in
advanced process control strategies such as real-time optimization and model-based
20
M. N. Fuad et al.
predictive controls. Although first-principle based modeling is very useful for design
purpose and as an aid for the understanding, black-boxed modeling that employs
machine learning principles such as neural network and support vector machine is very
useful for real-time applications that demand faster and robust computations. Moreover,
the developments of the corresponding machine learning models are less demanding as
long as sufficient collections of input-output data samples are available for training
purpose. Once trained, the corresponding models can be used effectively and efficiently
to achieve various objectives such as operation point optimization or model-based
controls. Therefore, driven by these motivations, this paper seeks to study the
application of several machine learning methods to model the power performance
behavior of a solid oxide fuel cells operation. Specifically, four types of machine
learning methods i.e. artificial neural network, fuzzy inference system, support vector
machines and genetic programming are applied in this study in order to observe their
performances in modeling the operating behavior of the corresponding SOFC system.
Machine Learning Based Modeling for Solid Oxide Fuel Cells Power Performance
Prediction
21
membership functions stored in the fuzzy knowledge base. In the next part i.e. inference
engine, a collections of IF-THEN type fuzzy rules will convert the fuzzy input to the
fuzzy output. Finally in the defuzzifier part, the fuzzy output of the inference engine will
be converted to crisp output by using the membership function analogous to the ones
employed by the fuzzifier. Currently, two types of fuzzy inference systems are widely
employed, i.e. Mamdani and Takagi-Sugeno. Moreover, the Takagi-Sugeno fuzzy
inference system can be trained by an adaptive technique in which the parameters of
the membership functions are optimized with respect to the given samples of inputoutput data.
22
M. N. Fuad et al.
Machine Learning Based Modeling for Solid Oxide Fuel Cells Power Performance
Prediction
23
SVM, R = 0.99841
1
0.5
0.5
Predicted outputs
Predicted outputs
ANN, R = 0.99922
1
-0.5
-1
-1
-0.5
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
Actual outputs
0.4
0.6
0.8
-1
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
0.5
0.5
-0.5
-1
-1
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.4
0.6
0.8
GP, R = 0.99850
Predicted outputs
Predicted outputs
ANFIS, R = 0.99825
-0.2
0
0.2
Actual outputs
-0.5
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
Actual outputs
0.4
0.6
0.8
-1
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
Actual outputs
24
M. N. Fuad et al.
SVM
7000
6000
6000
5000
5000
Power (W)
Power (W)
ANN
7000
4000
Actual (FU = 0.75, Tin = 1073 K)
Predicted (FU = 0.75, Tin = 1073 K)
Actual (FU = 0.85, Tin = 1173 K)
Predicted (FU = 0.85, Tin = 1173 K)
3000
2000
1000
20
40
60
80
100
Current (A)
120
140
4000
Actual (FU = 0.75, Tin = 1073 K)
Predicted (FU = 0.75, Tin = 1073 K)
Actual (FU = 0.85, Tin = 1173 K)
Predicted (FU = 0.85, Tin = 1173 K)
3000
2000
1000
20
160
40
60
7000
6000
6000
5000
5000
4000
Actual (FU = 0.75, Tin = 1073 K)
Predicted (FU = 0.75, Tin = 1073 K)
Actual (FU = 0.85, Tin = 1173 K)
Predicted (FU = 0.85, Tin = 1173 K)
3000
2000
1000
20
40
60
80
100
Current (A)
120
140
160
GP
7000
Power (W)
Power (W)
ANFIS
80
100
Current (A)
120
140
4000
Actual (FU = 0.75, Tin = 1073 K)
Predicted (FU = 0.75, Tin = 1073 K)
Actual (FU = 0.85, Tin = 1173 K)
Predicted (FU = 0.85, Tin = 1173 K)
3000
2000
160
1000
20
40
60
80
100
Current (A)
120
140
160
Figure 5. Comparisons of actual and predicted power performance curves (air molar flowrate =
0.012 mol/s)
5. Conclusions
In this study, we have compared different types of machine learning methods to model
the power performance behavior of a tubular SOFC operation. Among the different
types of machine learning methods that were covered in this study, it was found out that
ANN method has slighlty better performance in predicting the power performance
behavior of the corresponding SOFC system under various operating conditions. The
result from this study opens the possibility for applying the corresponding machine
learning method for SOFC performance maps constructions and operation point
optimization.
References
Bishop, C. M. (1995). Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Chang, C. C., & Lin, C. J. (2002). Training nu-support vector regression: theory and algorithms.
Neural Computation, 14(8), 1959-1977.
Ivanciuc, O. (2007). Applications of support vector machines in chemistry. In K. B. Lipkowitz &
T. R. Cundari (Eds.), Reviews in Computational Chemistry (Vol. 23, pp. 291-400). Weinheim:
Wiley-VCH.
Koza, J. (1992). Genetic Programming: On the Programming of Computers by Means of Natural
Selection. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Searson, D. P., Leahy, D. E., & Willis, M. J. (2010). GPTIPS: An open source genetic
programming toolbox for multigene symbolic regression. Paper presented at the International
MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists Hong Kong.
Stambouli, A. B. (2011). Fuel cells: The expectations for an environmental-friendly and
sustainable source of energy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15, 4507-4520.
Takagi, T., & Sugeno, M. (1985). Fuzzy identification of systems and its applications to modeling
and control. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 15, 116-132.