An experimental investigation on the performance of direct methanol fuel cell using new anode and cathode flow field designs

•DMFC’s experimental performance is presented for the new anode and cathode designs.•By using 3 anode flowrates (2, 5 &8mL/min) and 3 concentrations (1, 2 &3mol/L).•Upgrade by design 2, 3 & 4 is 142%, 94% &136%, stage 1; 74%, 125% &40%, stage 2.•Performance improvement by designs 2, 3 and 4 is 16%, -33% and -45% in stage 3.•New designs evacuate the CO2 bubbles & byproduct water faster and more efficiently. This is a comprehensive study of the DMFC through the introduction of new channel designs. A traditional serpentine design with a rib and channel width of 0.8mm on an area of 50mm×50mm is designated as design-1 and used as the reference channel design. Three other new designs are fabricated and tested in comparison with design-1. A 4-outlet, 1-inlet, 4-zone serpentine with 0.8mm of rib and channel width, is designated as design-2. A 4-outlet, 1-inlet, 4-zone serpentine with a converging channel width is designated as design-3. A 4-outlet, 1-inlet, 4-zone zigzag serpentine with a converging channel width is designated as design-4. The study was done in three stages. The first stage investigates the effect of anode channel designs by fixing the cathode design to design-1 and varying the anode designs from design-1 to design-4. The second stage investigates the effect of cathode designs by fixing the anode design to design-1 and varying the cathode designs from design −1 to −4. The third stage investigates the effect of using the same designs at both the anode and cathode sides. All the stages were tested using three anode flowrates (2,5, and 8mL/min) and three methanol concentrations (1, 2, and 3mol/L). Higher concentrations perform better than lower concentrations while lower flowrates perform better than higher flowrates. The percentage improvement by the new designs in comparison to the reference design is: 142%, 94%, and 136% for the first stage; 74%, 125%, and 40% for the second stage; and 16%, -33% and -45% for the third stage, and the order being design −2, −3 and −4 respectively. Design −3 and −4 underperform in the third stage due to the availability of direct paths that boost methanol crossover when using the same design of anode and cathode. The new designs evacuate the CO2 bubbles and byproduct water faster and more efficiently than the reference design.