Fundamental and Practical Aspects of Break‐In/Conditioning of Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cells

Abstract Proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) have proven to be a promising power source for various applications ranging from portable devices to automotive and stationary power systems. The production of PEMFC involves numerous stages in the value chain, with each stage presenting unique challenges and opportunities to improve the overall performance and durability of the PEMFC stack. These include steps such as manufacturing the key components such as the platinum‐based catalyst, processing these components into the membrane electrode assemblies (MEAs), and stacking the MEAs to ultimately produce a PEMFC stack. However, it is also known that the break‐in or conditioning phase of the stack plays a crucial role in the final performance as well as durability. It involves several key phenomena such as hydration of the membrane, swelling of the ionomer, redistribution of the catalyst and the creation of suitable electrochemical interfaces – establishment of the triple phase boundary. These improve the proton conductivity, the mass transport of reactants and products, the catalytic activity of the electrode and thus the overall efficiency of the FC. The cruciality of break‐in is demonstrated by the improvement in performance, which can even be over 50 % compared to the initial state. The state‐of‐the‐art approach for the break‐in of MEAs involves an electrochemical protocol, such as voltage cycling, using a PEMFC testing station. This method is time‐consuming, equipment‐intensive, and costly. Therefore, new, elegant, and cost‐effective solutions are needed. Nevertheless, the primary aim is to achieve maximum/optimal performance so that it is fully operational and ready for the market. It is therefore essential to better understand and deconvolute these complex mechanisms taking place during break‐in/conditioning. Strategies include controlled humidity and temperature cycling, novel electrode materials and other advanced break‐in methods such as air braking, vacuum activation or steaming. In addition, it is critical to address the challenges associated with standardisation and quantification of protocols to enable interlaboratory comparisons to further advance the field.