Skip to main content
NCBI home page
ACS AuthorChoice logoLink to ACS AuthorChoice
. 2026 Feb 4;9(4):2050–2056. doi: 10.1021/acsaem.5c03843

Relief Zones Enhance the Durability of Ultrathin Membranes in Electrochemical Conversion Devices

Audrey K Taylor †, Megan McVeigh †, Catherine Weiss ‡, Kenneth C Neyerlin †,*
PMCID: PMC12933513  PMID: 41756049

Abstract

Premature failures in electrochemical conversion systems often result when membrane electrode assemblies (MEAs) use ultrathin (≤15 μm-thick) polymer electrolyte membranes, susceptible to mechanical degradation from stress concentrations arising from device-level integration. Herein, relief zones were developed to mitigate mechanical degradation by alleviating excess and nonuniform compression across active areas. Relief zones, created through ablation of carbonaceous diffusion media, enable seamless adaptation across MEA dimensions without need for hardware modifications. Demonstrated using fuel cells as a case study, accelerated stress tests revealed a 6-fold lifetime improvement (∼1500 h) compared to conventional edge-protected MEAs, decoupling device-level engineering effects from material limitations.

Keywords: polymer electrolyte membrane, durability, accelerated stress test, mechanical failure, degradation, electrochemical conversion

graphic file with name ae5c03843_0007.jpg

graphic file with name ae5c03843_0006.jpg

State-of-the-art polymer electrolyte membranes (PEMs) used in electrochemical systems have moved toward ultrathin dimensions (i.e., ≤15 μm-thick) to reduce cost and improve performance. , At these ultrathin dimensions, however, trade-offs arise from increased reactant crossover and compromised mechanical stability. In particular, polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) benefit from ultrathin PEMs in the membrane electrode assembly (MEA), positioning them for deployment in heavy-duty transport and stationary power applications among other emerging uses. Total cost of ownership analyses suggest that thicker membranes could be more cost-effective compared to thinner PEMs since refueling would be less frequent. This benefit becomes more significant for vehicles maintained over long durations (e.g., 15 yrs). Nevertheless, cost analyses indicate an optimal thickness between 10 and 12 μm, since lowered protonic resistances and higher power densities can be achieved, thereby decreasing the number of cells in a stack. Coordinated material development efforts aimed at stabilizing and mitigating degradation in ultrathin PEMs are relevant to a range of electrochemical conversion systems; thus, assembly or packaging strategies also have broad applicability regardless of technology type.

Chemical design strategies that improve transport properties are often linked to reduced mechanical stability. Entropic penalties associated with increased hydration of ionic domains pose challenges to the dimensional stability of PEMs with high ion exchange capacities. Lessening such trade-offs have included the use of reinforcement layers, which minimize in-plane dimensional changes. Although these approaches can reduce mechanical degradation, their efficacy depends on an appropriate integration of the PEM within not only the MEA but also the single-cell or stack hardware in which it is to be examined.

The architecture of the MEA and its integration within the cell hardware can impact the occurrence of premature failures in the PEM. Nonideal component integration, including both material defects from processing , and stresses generated from compression during cell assembly, can lead to early mechanical degradation. These irregularities often go undetected during routine performance assessments without specifically sensitive testing conditions. Premature degradation events, identified as pin-holes, cracks, and/or tears, are most prevalent in PEMs with ultrathin dimensions, and although reinforcement layers mitigate dimensional changes from water uptake, they do not prevent or resolve these integration-related challenges.

Subgaskets (SGs) placed between the PEM and the gas diffusion layer (GDL) or porous transport layer (PTL) have traditionally been used to protect the PEM from irregularities and local stress concentrations along the sealing perimeter. , Dimensionally stable SGs are used to limit interfacial deformation of the soft PEM with relatively stiff materials and to limit buckling within voids upon water uptake. , These so-called “edge-protected MEAs” have demonstrated improved durability compared to those without, as well as for PEMs ≥25 μm in thickness. , These conventional edge-protected MEAs rely on compression gaskets (CGs) for hard-stop sealing along the cell perimeter (Figure a). The resulting thickness of the CG within the assembled hardware specifies the compression target of the GDL (or PTL), ultimately affecting device performance and durability, − whereas the SG extends to mask the CG-to-GDL interface with the PEM, providing additional mechanical support. Thin SGs (≤45 μm) ensure mechanical loading is focused onto CGs for adequate sealing. Increased pressure from excessive GDL compression along the SG regions was, however, found to be a primary contributor to early mechanical degradation in conventional edge-protected MEAs. This limitation underscores the need to revise current MEA designs to isolate intrinsic material properties from those related to integration and device engineering to achieve long-term operation and reproducible durability outcomes for ultrathin PEMs. To address these shortcomings, a novel MEA architecture is proposed to enable robust integration of ultrathin PEMs broadly applicable to electrochemical conversion systems.

1.

1

Open in a new tab

Schematics of the conventional edge-protected membrane electrode assembly (MEA) and the design concept for the relief zone MEA. The (a) edge-protected MEA utilizes a subgasket (SG, yellow) to stabilize the membrane from stresses along the MEA perimeter. The relief zone strategy in (b) is prepared using a raster laser ablation of the gas diffusion layer (GDL) along the overlap regions with the SG. Sealing of the MEA in both cases is achieved using compression gaskets (CGs, blue).

In this letter, we propose a relief zone strategy to alleviate stress from mechanical overcompression prevalent in MEAs. The relief zone mitigates mechanical degradation and promotes a uniform compression across the active area, enabling failure assessments strictly related to the chemical and mechanical properties of the PEM in question. Laser ablation was used to remove diffusion media along the exposed SG regions, leaving behind an intact microporous layer (MPL) as depicted in Figure b. The relief zone depth should be proportional to or preferably greater than the change in thickness specified by the compression target of the GDL (Equation S1). Cross-sectional and top-down images of the relief zone MEA are provided in Figure S1a-b. The relief zone approach is fully customizable, enabling ease of modification to a range of electrode component dimensions and material thicknesses without the need for costly hardware modifications. Thus, the use of relief zones is a promising approach for integration of ultrathin, state-of-the-art PEMs across electrochemical conversion systems that utilize zero-gap, MEA designs at specified compressions.

Spatial pressure distributions were assessed to examine stress points across the MEA within the single-cell hardware. Three-dimensional reconstructions of the surface contact pressure distributions are shown in Figure a-b for the edge-protected only and relief zone MEA, respectively. These data include the inlets of a quad serpentine land-channel array with CG and edge-protected SG regions. Figure a exhibits a variable pressure distribution across the CG edge with high mechanical loading concentrated along the SG and the flow-field lands. In contrast, the relief zone MEA shows a higher mechanical loading at the CG, ensuring a leak-free cell assembly and lessened pressure across the lands (Figure b). The pressure drop between the CG and the flow-field are indicative of the relief zone, which mitigates overcompression of the GDL along the lands. These results highlight the ability of relief zones to redistribute mechanical loading more effectively than edge-protection alone, establishing a direct link between contact pressure uniformity with implications to MEA durability and performance.

2.

2

Open in a new tab

Three-dimensional (3D) surface reconstructions of the pressure distributions located at the flow-field inlets for the (a) edge-protected only and (b) relief zone MEAs and the associated mean pressure profiles showing the direction orthogonal to the land-channel paths for (c) and (d), respectively. The shaded regions in (c, d) represent one standard deviation from the mean pressure values. Polarization curves acquired in H2/air at 80 °C, 100% RH, and 150/150 kPa for the (e) relief zone and edge-protection only MEAs and the (f) corresponding high frequency resistance (HFR) corrected cell voltages.

Mean pressure profiles across the MEAs are shown in Figure c-d. The edge-protected only MEA exhibits a considerable concentration of pressure along the SG and a higher pressure and deviation across the flow-field (Figure c), whereas the relief zone MEA shows the highest pressures along the CG. The pressure drop at the SG indicates the presence of relief zones, which alleviates excess GDL compression, enabling a uniform pressure distribution (Figure d). These data agree with the selected reconstructions, and the pressure contact films are provided in Figure S2a-b. In short, regions of overcompression create irregular pressure concentrations and gradients that result in mechanical fatigue in addition to limited electrochemical performance.

Polarization data from the relief zone MEAs exhibit a ∼16 mV decrease in kinetic overpotential (Figure e-f). This small kinetic offset could indicate differences in the local concentration of O2 or water activity at the Pt-ionomer interface from compression-induced densification. Lower cell voltages are observed for the edge-protected only MEA with exacerbated ohmic and mass transport losses and are consistent for replicate relief zone MEAs (Figure S3). The edge-protected only MEA experiences a GDL compression of 96% along the SG, indicating a high compression gradient that likely decreases to a 20% compression target at the MEA center. The porosity of the GDL in this case may be negatively impacted by limited O2 diffusion and the transfer of reactants and products in both the pore-structure and catalyst layer. , Similar high frequency resistance (HFR) values indicate comparable interfacial contact and ionic resistance, suggesting performance differences are due to mass transport losses from GDL constriction. The edge-protected only MEA exhibits higher H2 crossover limiting current density measurements (i H2) at beginning of test (BOT), revealing that nonuniform overcompression can also drive PEM deformation and structural thinning at lands and intrusion into channels (Figure S4). Thus, relief zones can lower reactant crossover and enhance performance, enabling accurate and uniform GDL compression targets while mitigating PEM deformation.

Enhanced durability of the relief zone MEA was demonstrated during the combined chemical-mechanical accelerated stress test (AST) and evaluated using open circuit voltage (OCV) assessments and infrared (IR) thermography at the end of the test (EOT). Aggressive mechanical cycling (i.e., 100/0% RH at 30/45 s intervals) under an OCV hold condition assists in exposing imperfections in the MEA that arise from nonideal component integration either by fabrication and/or assembly techniques. , The edge-protected only MEA approaches <0.9 V OCV at ∼250 h (Figure a). The corresponding IR thermography data at EOT show local heating along the top-edge of the MEA from the exothermic oxidation of H2 at exposed Pt sites, indicating through-plane perforation near the SG, whereas the relief zone MEAs approach <0.9 V OCV at 1.2 k and 1.4 k h for replicates 1 and 2, respectively, demonstrating a 6-fold enhancement (Figure c and e). The respective EOT IR thermography data for relief zone MEAs suggest H2 crossover by thinning, as indicated by broad, circular hot spots with lower relative temperatures located at or near flow-field outlets (Figure d and f).

3.

3

Open in a new tab

Open circuit voltage (OCV) profiles acquired from the combined chemical-mechanical accelerated stress test (AST) and the corresponding end of test (EOT) infrared (IR) thermography images are shown in (a, b) for the edge-protected only MEA; in (c, d) for the relief zone MEA, replicate 1; and in (e, f) for the relief zone MEA, replicate 2. All of the MEAs have the same orientation, as indicated in (d).

Cross-sectional, PEM thickness measurements of EOT samples acquired from failure, inlet, and outlet locations also indicate PEM thinning in relief zone MEAs (Figure S5). These data reveal thicknesses of 2.8 ± 0.38 μm and 11.7 ± 1.03 μm at PEM failure sites for the edge-protected only and relief zone MEAs, respectively. Pronounced loss of PEM material for the edge-protected MEA is demonstrated, whereas the relief zone MEA retains 78% of its initial thickness, corroborating the effectivity of the proposed method for mitigating mechanical degradation. Moreover, at the inlet and outlet locations, where pinhole failures are absent, relief zone PEMs exhibit retention of 72% and 89%, respectively, and with 1k h longer durability lifetime.

Interestingly, ICP-MS (Figure S6) analyses show that both MEAs exhibit higher Ce concentration at the outlets. At OCV, the PEM hydration state is dictated primarily by inlet humidification. Solvation-mediated transport of Ce and Fe toward outlets is driven by diffusional water gradients due to higher λ (H2O/SO3H) at the inlet. , Higher mechanical stress and/or pressure gradients will also lower the λ for a PEM equilibrated with a specific water activity due to a reduction in free volume within ionomer water domains. Consequently, the edge-protected only MEA experiences an amplified hydraulic potential gradient from the center of the active area toward the inactive regions beneath the CG. This effect manifests as reduced Ce retention and a higher transport of Ce from active to inactive areas, as measured by XRF (Figure S7), whereas the relief zone architecture minimizes compression at the active area boundary, maintaining a higher local water content and a more uniform hydration profile. By reducing the magnitude of the water flux driving force, this design suppresses the convective displacement of scavengers, resulting in the higher Ce retention within the active area and lowering residual Fe content. To further resolve underlying PEM failure modes, OCV transient analyses were used to leverage deviations from predicted voltage values under defined operating conditions.

Deviations from thermodynamically derived OCV predictions under specific operating conditions can be used to monitor irreversible degradation events. Figures a and b show the deconvoluted OCV transients for low and high RH conditions. Nernstian behavior and kinetic effects elicit higher dry OCV responses due to greater reactant partial pressures at low RH. Herein, nonrecoverable losses are attributed to PEM degradation, as demonstrated through declines in dry OCV as losses from H2 crossover increase. Critical failures in Figure a and b (i.e., dashed boxes) are evident where similar OCVs occur under dry and wet conditions, resulting in a ΔOCV of 0 mV (i.e., wet OCV subtracted from dry OCV). , A reversal of the dry and wet OCV responses (i.e., wet OCV ≫ dry OCV) can indicate PEM perforation, since H2 crossover is attenuated by water uptake and swelling and higher crossover losses occur in the dry state. Interestingly, the relief zone MEAs do not exhibit this reversal behavior (Figure b) but rather scattering behavior evidently from thinning rather than perforation. Convergence of dry and wet OCV responses where ΔOCV remains near 0 mV occur for 200–300 h. Zoomed-in transient plots of this behavior are provided in Figures S8 and S9. Use of relief zones in combination with reinforcement layers suggests that through-plane perforations from mechanical stresses are mitigated such that thinning becomes the dominant failure mode.

4.

4

Open in a new tab

OCV transients for the (a) edge-protected only MEA and the (b) relief zone MEA, replicate 1, where a single voltage cycle was extracted 500 s prior to the end of each 10 h interval and normalized to the initial voltage (V′). The dashed boxes in (a) and (b) highlight the region of failure. The ΔOCV for selected time points during the AST for the (c) edge-protected only MEA and the (d) relief zone MEA, replicate 1, calculated from the last voltage value at the end of each cycle. The H2 crossover limiting current density measurements (i H2) acquired at 20 h intervals for the (e) edge-protected only MEA and the (f) relief zone MEA, replicate 1.

Figures c and d show the ΔOCV values at selected intervals. The ΔOCV at BOT was determined as 41 mV (dashed line), defined by the Nernst potential corrected for H2 crossover and cathodic kinetic losses at both low and high RH. The edge-protected MEA in Figure c exhibits a decrease in ΔOCV after 70 h, while increases to i H2 are not apparent until 200 h at 30% RH (Figure e). In contrast, decreases in ΔOCV track with increasing i H2 at 30% RH for the relief zone MEA (Figure d and f). Higher and/or nonuniform effective PEM hydration from overcompression of the GDL can result in slowed water transport and, therefore, obfuscated i H2 values. Similar divergences between ΔOCV declines and crossover were previously encountered for cracked electrodes with increased and nonuniform water retention. Thus, relying on i H2 alone does not fully capture the PEM degradation mechanisms. Similarly, the relief zone MEA exhibits little to no increase for i H2 at 100% RH, as this measurement does not effectively capture the thinning behavior. To further elucidate such failure modes, a series of i H2 measurements were performed to separate diffusive (i H2 diffusive) and convective (i H2 convective) crossover contributions to distinguish between thinning and through-plane perforations.

Figures a and b show the i H2 versus H2 mole fraction (ΧH2 = 0.1, 0.3, 0.6, and 1.0) for symmetric (ΔP = 0 kPa) and differential backpressure (ΔP = 30 kPa) conditions for the edge-protected only and relief zone MEA, respectively. In brief, slopes for ΔP = 0 kPa represent i H2 diffusive, while slopes for ΔP = 30 kPa include both i H2 diffusive and i H2 convective terms, and the y-intercept at ΧH2 = 0 represents the contribution from shorting current. At BOT, the i H2 diffusive and i H2 convective terms are similar in magnitude for the edge-protected only (i.e., 4.16 mA/cm2 and 60.2 μA/cm2) and the relief zone MEA (i.e., 4.09 mA/cm2 and 35.7 μA/cm2). Excessive compression and a high pressure gradient caused early failures near the SG frame in edge-protected only MEAs, as demonstrated by an increase to 21.9 mA/cm2 for i H2 convective at EOT (Figure a). In contrast, the relief zone MEA exhibits a modest increase where i H2 convective = 1.82 mA/cm2 (Figure b). The time-resolved breakdown in Figure c shows an increase to i H2 diffusive and minimal i H2 convective at EOT for the relief zone MEA. In short, the relatively low i H2 convective contribution further suggests that the reinforced PEMs with relief zones exhibit thinning as a failure mode even when subjected to aggressive mechanical cycling during the AST. In contrast, excess and nonuniform compression in edge-protected only MEAs result in early failures which obscure assessments toward intrinsic PEM material properties.

5.

5

Open in a new tab

i H2 versus H2 mole fractions (ΧH2) at 100% RH under ΔP = 0 and ΔP = 30 kPa for the (a) relief zone MEA, replicate 1 and the (b) edge-protected only MEA at beginning of test (BOT) and EOT. The (c) time-resolved i H2 convective and diffusive contributions for the edge-protected only and relief zone, replicate 2 MEAs. The (d) OCV performance data evaluated for other ultrathin, reinforced PEMs compared to our work using the combined chemical-mechanical AST. It should be noted that this work was performed using a more aggressive, longer dry cycle.

Distinguishing between intrinsic material properties and integration-driven failure modes is critical to directing future research endeavors and yielding a proper assessment of the state of technology for subsequent scale-up. While thickness-independent durability for ultrathin reinforced PEMs has been reported for combined chemical mechanical ASTs, the results were ultimately inconclusive due to early mechanical failures from stress concentrations along the frames. Figure d compares the durability of relief zone MEAs against 8 and 12 μm-thick PEMs probed under less aggressive conditions (i.e., shorter dry cycle, 45/30 s wet/dry). While this comparison provides a qualitative understanding, it underscores the importance of optimizing device-level integration prior to material assessment and showcases relief zones as an effective strategy for reducing local stress concentrations near electrode edges inherent to traditional methods of edge-protection.

To properly assess material properties within small scale devices, we move past limitations in single-cell assembly techniques toward robust integration of ultrathin PEM materials. As material properties such as hydration, swelling, and thickness change, revisiting cell-level engineering to understand the boundary conditions is critical for proper material assessments. Herein, we show that relief zones can be applied to improve the signal-to-noise ratio of material properties over cell-level engineering to not only yield accurate assessments of material limitations but also properly define failure modes for subsequent material-based mitigation strategies. Root causes of early mechanical failures were identified and mitigated using a stress relief zone strategy, demonstrating a 6-fold improvement in AST lifetime. Analyses of scavenger retentions in post-mortem MEAs highlighted the critical role of structural architecture in governing these distributions and suggest further investigation into the coupled effects of mechanical and chemical degradation. Linkage of absolute pressures along lands and the resulting diffusion media compression could guide new metrics to mitigate structural impacts. These findings could assist in an improved translation of representative durability characterizations from single-cell- to stack-level platforms.

Supplementary Material

ae5c03843_si_001.pdf (1.4MB, pdf)

Acknowledgments

This work was authored in part by Alliance for Energy Innovation, LLC, the manager and operator of the National Laboratory of the Rockies for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. This material is based on work performed by the Million Mile Fuel Cell Truck (M2FCT) Consortium, technology manager Greg Kleen. Funding was provided by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office (HFTO). We gratefully acknowledge capability development in fuel cell test stand modifications and support from Ellis Klein, Cole Delery, and Guido Bender. The views expressed in the article do not necessarily represent the views of the DOE or the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the U.S. Government retains a nonexclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this work, or allow others to do so, for U.S. Government purposes.

The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsaem.5c03843.

  • The Supporting Information includes the experimental methods, optical, scanning electron microscopy, pressure film images, polarization, H2 crossover limiting current density and membrane thickness measurements, the ICP-MS and XRF results for the MEAs at end of test, and the open circuit voltage transients. (PDF)

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

References

  1. Gittleman C. S., Jia H., De Castro E. S., Chisholm C. R. I., Kim Y. S.. Proton Conductors for Heavy-Duty Vehicle Fuel Cells. Joule. 2021;5(7):1660–1677. doi: 10.1016/j.joule.2021.05.016. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Kienitz B., Kolde J., Priester S., Baczkowski C., Crum M.. Ultra-Thin Reinforced Ionomer Membranes to Meet Next Generation Fuel Cell Targets. ECS Trans. 2011;41(1):1521–1530. doi: 10.1149/1.3635683. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Luo X., Lau G., Tesfaye M., Arthurs C. R., Cordova I., Wang C., Yandrasits M., Kusoglu A.. Thickness Dependence of Proton-Exchange-Membrane Properties. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2021;168(10):104517. doi: 10.1149/1945-7111/ac2973. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cullen D. A., Neyerlin K. C., Ahluwalia R. K., Mukundan R., More K. L., Borup R. L., Weber A. Z., Myers D. J., Kusoglu A.. New Roads and Challenges for Fuel Cells in Heavy-Duty Transportation. Nature Energy. 2021;6(5):462–474. doi: 10.1038/s41560-021-00775-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Gittleman C. S., Kongkanand A., Masten D., Gu W.. Materials Research and Development Focus Areas for Low Cost Automotive Proton-Exchange Membrane Fuel Cells. Current Opinion in Electrochemistry. 2019;18:81–89. doi: 10.1016/j.coelec.2019.10.009. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Kienitz B.. Optimizing Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Thickness to Maximize Fuel Cell Vehicle Range. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy. 2021;46(19):11176–11182. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.03.126. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Shi S., Weber A. Z., Kusoglu A.. Structure/Property Relationship of Nafion XL Composite Membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2016;516:123–134. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2016.06.004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Taylor A. K., Baez-Cotto C., Hu L., Smith C., Rodriguez-Nazario A., Young J. L., Mauger S., Neyerlin K. C.. The Influence of Electrode Crack Dimensions on the Durability of Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cells. J. Power Sources. 2025;628:235884. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2024.235884. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Taylor A. K., Smith C., Neyerlin K. C.. Mitigation and Diagnosis of Pin-Hole Formation in Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cells. J. Power Sources. 2023;571:232971. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2023.232971. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Wang M., Medina S., Ochoa-Lozano J., Mauger S., Pylypenko S., Ulsh M., Bender G.. Visualization, Understanding, and Mitigation of Process-Induced-Membrane Irregularities in Gas Diffusion Electrode-Based Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cells. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy. 2021;46(27):14699–14712. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.01.186. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Qiu D., Peng L., Liang P., Yi P., Lai X.. Mechanical Degradation of Proton Exchange Membrane Along the MEA Frame in Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cells. Energy. 2018;165:210–222. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2018.09.136. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Wang M., Taylor A. K., Ochoa-Lozano J., Medina S., Pfeilsticker J. R., Mauger S. A., Pylypenko S., Ulsh M., Bender G.. The Impact of Hot-Press Conditions on the Durability of Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cells. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy. 2025;98:639–647. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2024.12.098. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Yao Z., Zhou F., Tu C., Tan J., Pan M.. Decay Behaviour of Ultrathin Reinforced Membranes in PEMFCs Subjected to the Combination of Mechanical/Chemical Accelerated Stress Testing. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy. 2024;50:200–208. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.08.101. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. James, R. L. ; Valentine, S. D. ; Liestra, J. . Manufacture or Membrane Electrode Assembly with Edge Protection for PEM Fuel Cells. US Patent US8,470,497: 2006.
  15. Leistra, J. ; James, R. L. ; Dobulis, D. . Controlled Electrode Overlap Architecture for Improved MEA Durability. U.S. Patent US7,955,750: 2011.
  16. Yang D., Tan Y., Li B., Ming P., Xiao Q., Zhang C.. A Review of the Transition Region of Membrane Electrode Assembly of Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cells: Design, Degradation, and Mitigation. Membranes. 2022;12(3):306. doi: 10.3390/membranes12030306. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Kink J., Suermann M., Ise M., Bensmann B., Junker P., Hanke-Rauschenbach R.. Reinforcing Membranes with Subgaskets in Proton Exchange Membrane Water Electrolysis: A Model-Based Analysis. J. Power Sources. 2024;614:234987. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2024.234987. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Wang M., Rome G., Phillips A., Ulsh M., Bender G.. Effective Electrode Edge Protection for Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Drive Cycle Operation. ECS Trans. 2019;92(8):351–359. doi: 10.1149/09208.0351ecst. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Sompalli, B. ; Gasteiger, H. A. ; Litteer, B. A. ; Yan, S. G. . Edge-Protected Catalyst-Coated Diffusion Media and Membrane Electrode Assemblies. Patents US8,007,949: 2011.
  20. Sassin M., Garsany Y., Gould B., Swider-Lyons K.. Impact of Compressive Stress on MEA Pore Structure and Its Consequence on PEMFC Performance. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2016;163(8):F808. doi: 10.1149/2.0291608jes. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Lee D. U., Joensen B., Jenny J., Ehlinger V. M., Lee S.-W., Abiose K., Xu Y., Sarkar A., Lin T. Y., Hahn C.. Controlling Mass Transport in Direct Carbon Dioxide Zero-Gap Electrolyzers Via Cell Compression. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2023;11(46):16661–16668. doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c05494. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. García-Salaberri P. A., van Eijk L., Bangay W., Ferner K. J., Ha M. H., Moore M., Perea I., Kusoglu A., Secanell M., Das P. K.. Materials Engineering for High Performance and Durability Proton Exchange Membrane Water Electrolyzers. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. 2025;8(18):13050–13121. doi: 10.1021/acsaem.5c01989. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Zenyuk I. V., Parkinson D. Y., Connolly L. G., Weber A. Z.. Gas-Diffusion-Layer Structural Properties under Compression Via X-Ray Tomography. J. Power Sources. 2016;328:364–376. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2016.08.020. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Atkinson III R. W., Garsany Y., Gould B. D., Swider-Lyons K. E., Zenyuk I. V.. The Role of Compressive Stress on Gas Diffusion Media Morphology and Fuel Cell Performance. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. 2018;1(1):191–201. doi: 10.1021/acsaem.7b00077. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Simon C., Hasché F., Gasteiger H. A.. Influence of the Gas Diffusion Layer Compression on the Oxygen Transport in Pem Fuel Cells at High Water Saturation Levels. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2017;164(6):F591. doi: 10.1149/2.0691706jes. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Kulkarni N., Kok M. D., Jervis R., Iacoviello F., Meyer Q., Shearing P. R., Brett D. J.. The Effect of Non-Uniform Compression and Flow-Field Arrangements on Membrane Electrode Assemblies-X-Ray Computed Tomography Characterisation and Effective Parameter Determination. J. Power Sources. 2019;426:97–110. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2019.04.018. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Lai Y. H., Rahmoeller K. M., Hurst J. H., Kukreja R. S., Atwan M., Maslyn A. J., Gittleman C. S.. Accelerated Stress Testing of Fuel Cell Membranes Subjected to Combined Mechanical/Chemical Stressors and Cerium Migration. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2018;165(6):F3217–F3229. doi: 10.1149/2.0241806jes. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  28. Baker A. M., Mukundan R., Spernjak D., Judge E. J., Advani S. G., Prasad A. K., Borup R. L.. Cerium Migration During PEM Fuel Cell Accelerated Stress Testing. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2016;163(9):F1023–F1031. doi: 10.1149/2.0181609jes. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Kusoglu A., Kienitz B. L., Weber A. Z.. Understanding the Effects of Compression and Constraints on Water Uptake of Fuel-Cell Membranes. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2011;158(12):B1504. doi: 10.1149/2.097112jes. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. Kundu S., Fowler M., Simon L. C., Abouatallah R.. Reversible and Irreversible Degradation in Fuel Cells During Open Circuit Voltage Durability Testing. J. Power Sources. 2008;182(1):254–258. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2008.04.009. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

ae5c03843_si_001.pdf (1.4MB, pdf)

Articles from ACS Applied Energy Materials are provided here courtesy of American Chemical Society

RESOURCES