本研究重點聚焦於固態氧化物燃料電池系統中的「重組器」單元。研究使用計算流體力學進行，所分析之重組器幾何為平板型與平板型內置圓柱陣列結構，其中，圓柱陣列結構之主要目的，在於期望能藉此改善傳統平板型重組器的轉化效率。觸媒材料主要為 Ni/Al₂O₃，並以塗佈方式附著於平板壁面與圓柱表面。所採用之產氫方式為蒸汽甲烷重組反應(Steam Methane Reforming, SMR)
本研究主要可分為三個部分：(1) 平板型重組器的效率分析；(2) 放置圓柱陣列之平板流；(3) 放置雙排圓柱陣列之平板流。第一部分針對傳統平板型重組器進行分析評估平板間距 (W) 與反應區長度 (R) 對轉化效率及流場特性的影響，以了解基本反應流行為。第二部分則於第一部分所建立的平板型幾何為基礎，加入圓柱體陣列，進一步探討圓柱陣列擺放方式與化學反應發生位置對於反應流場的影響。第三部分為放置雙排圓柱陣列，探討改變入口速度對於整體重組器效率的影響。
平板型重組器模擬結果顯示出縮減平板間距對於提升甲烷轉化率的成效顯著優於增加反應區長度，在重組過程中，流道內存在明顯的橫向濃度梯度，反應物由高濃度向低濃度的壁面觸媒擴散。此質傳與表面反應的過程，是決定重組反應效率的關鍵。內置圓柱陣列的幾何下，壁面反應的轉化效率高度依賴於圓柱陣列長度與壁面反應區段的幾何一致性；兩者長度越相近，圓柱結構越能發揮其促進反應之效用。圓柱表面反應時，在固定圓柱數量的條件下，甲烷轉化效率會隨著圓柱間距比的增加而顯著提升，擴大間距比能有效促使反應物進入圓柱體之間，增加反應面積，進而最大化整體的轉化效率。雙排圓柱體的配置下，甲烷轉化效率與圓柱間距比呈正相關，但與入口流速呈現反比關係，過高的入口流速會大幅縮短流體滯留時間，使反應物來不及接觸觸媒即被帶往下游，並阻礙一氧化碳進行水氣轉移反應，使得中間產物在流道內大幅向下游延伸，無法被有效轉化與消耗。

This study focuses on the reformer unit within a solid oxide fuel cell system. The research is using computational fluid dynamics (CFD). The analyzed reformer geometries include a flat-plate configuration and a flat-plate with a built-in cylindrical arrays. The cylindrical arrays structure is primarily designed to improve the conversion efficiency of the conventional planar reformer. The primary catalyst material is Ni/Al₂O₃ which is coated onto the plate walls and cylinder surfaces. Hydrogen production in this research is driven by the Steam Methane Reforming (SMR) reaction.
The study is primarily divided into three parts: (1) efficiency analysis of a flat-plate reformer; (2) analysis of flat-plate flow with a single-row cylinder array; (3) analysis of flat-plate flow with a double-row cylinder array. The first part investigates the conventional flat-plate reformer, evaluating the effects of plate spacing (W) and reaction zone length (R) on conversion efficiency and flow field characteristics to understand fundamental reacting flow behaviors. Building upon the geometric framework established in the first part, the second part introduces cylinder arrays to further explore the impacts of array arrangements and reaction locations on the reacting flow field. The third part examines the double-row cylinder configuration, focusing on how varying inlet velocities affect the overall reform efficiency.
Simulation results of first part reveal that reducing plate spacing enhances methane conversion more effectively than extending the reaction zone, identifying transverse mass transfer as the key factor determining the overall reforming efficiency. For single-row cylinder array, wall reaction efficiency peaks at an optimal spacing ratio where the array matches the reaction zone length. Conversely, for cylinder surface reactions, wider spacing monotonically increases efficiency by improving reactant penetration. In double-row configurations, efficiency scales positively with spacing ratio but inversely with inlet velocity. High velocities drastically restrict residence time, preventing sufficient catalyst contact and suppressing the water-gas shift (WGS) reaction, causing intermediate products to extend substantially downstream within the channel and preventing them from being effectively converted and consumed.

[1] Energy Institute, “Statistical Review of World Energy,” 2025.
[2] “經濟部能源署, “發電量結構,” https://www.esist.org.tw/.”
[3] IPCC, “Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,” 2023.
[4] Hydrogen Council, “Hydrogen scaling up: A sustainable pathway for the global energy transition,” 2017.
[5] T. I. Guru. “Definition of fuel cell | What is a fuel cell?,” The Instrument Guru.
[6] Stanford Advanced Materials. “What Are Solid Oxide Fuel Cells?.”
[7] K. Huang and J. B. Goodenough, Solid oxide fuel cell technology: principles, performance and operations. 2009.
[8] F. Wang, Y. Cao, and G. Wang, “Thermoelectric generation coupling methanol steam reforming characteristic in microreactor,” Energy, vol. 80, pp. 642–653, 2015.
[9] J. Chen, J. Han, and D. Xu, “Efficient operation of autothermal microchannel reactors for the production of hydrogen by steam methane reforming,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 44, pp. 11546–11563, 2019.
[10] J. Meusinger, E. Riensche, and U. Stimming, “Reforming of natural gas in solid oxide fuel cell systems,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 71, pp. 315–320, 1998.
[11] K. P. Recknagle, R. E. Williford, L. A. Chick, D. R. Rector, and M. A. Khaleel, “Three-dimensional thermo-fluid electrochemical modeling of planar SOFC stacks,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 113, pp. 109–114, 2003.
[12] Z. Wu, Z. Guo, J. Yang, and Q. Wang, “Numerical investigation of hydrogen production via methane steam reforming in a novel packed bed reactor integrated with diverging tube,” Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 289, p. 117185, 2023.
[13] A. Karim, J. Bravo, D. Gorm, T. Conant, and A. Datye, “Comparison of wall-coated and packed-bed reactors for steam reforming of methanol,” Catalysis today, vol. 110, pp. 86–91, 2005.
[14] Z. Wu, J. Wang, B. Xie, J. Yang, and Q. Wang, “Methane steam reforming with axial variable diameter particle structures in grille-sphere composite packed bed: A numerical study of hydrogen production performance,” Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 240, p. 114163, 2021.
[15] S. Wei and C. Li, “Design and optimization of spiral heated tubular dimethyl ether (DME) steam reforming reactor,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 48, pp. 2231–2246, 2023.
[16] F. Alrashed and U. Zahid, “Comparative analysis of conventional steam methane reforming and PdAu membrane reactor for the hydrogen production,” Computers & Chemical Engineering, vol. 154, p. 107497, 2021.
[17] M. De-Souza, G. Zanin, and F. Moraes, “Parametric study of hydrogen production from ethanol steam reforming in a membrane microreactor,” Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering, vol. 30, pp. 355–367, 2013.
[18] V. Marcantonio and L. Scopel, “Thermodynamic models of solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs): a review,” Sustainability, vol. 16, p. 10773, 2024.
[19] S. Moarrefi, M. Jacob, C. e. Li, W. Cai, and L. Fan, “Internal dry reforming of methane in solid oxide fuel cells,” Chemical Engineering Journal, vol. 489, p. 151281, 2024.
[20] J. Xu and G. F. Froment, “Methane steam reforming, methanation and water‐gas shift: I. Intrinsic kinetics,” AIChE journal, vol. 35, pp. 88–96, 1989.
[21] A. Ashcroft, A. K. Cheetham, M. Green, and P. Vernon, “Partial oxidation of methane to synthesis gas using carbon dioxide,” Nature, vol. 352, pp. 225–226, 1991.
[22] J. H. Lunsford, “Catalytic conversion of methane to more useful chemicals and fuels: a challenge for the 21st century,” Catalysis today, vol. 63, pp. 165–174, 2000.
[23] I. Bobrova, N. Bobrov, V. Chesnokov, and V. Parmon, “Catalytic steam reforming of methane: New data on the contribution of homogeneous radical reactions in the gas phase: II. A ruthenium catalyst,” Kinetics and catalysis, vol. 42, pp. 805–812, 2001.
[24] J. L. C. Reetam Chakrabarti, Lanny D. Schmidt, “Effects of biomass inorganics on rhodium catalysts: I. Steam methane reforming,” Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, vol. 107, pp. 88–94, 2011.
[25] V. K. Jaiswar, S. Katheria, G. Deo, and D. Kunzru, “Effect of Pt doping on activity and stability of Ni/MgAl2O4 catalyst for steam reforming of methane at ambient and high pressure condition,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 42, pp. 18968–18976, 2017.
[26] V. D. S.Z. Abbas, T. Mahmud, “Kinetics study and modelling of steam methane reforming process over a NiO/Al2O3 catalyst in an adiabatic packed bed reactor,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 42, pp. 2889–2903, 2017.
[27] H. W. A. El Hawa, S.-T. B. Lundin, N. S. Patki, and J. D. Way, “Steam methane reforming in a PdAu membrane reactor: Long-term assessment,” international journal of hydrogen energy, vol. 41, pp. 10193–10201, 2016.
[28] S. Saeedi et al., “Resilient Ni and Ni–Ru catalysts for daily start-up and shutdown methane steam reforming via urea-assisted deposition precipitation,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 229, p. 154738, 2026.
[29] Y. Shan, Y. Liu, Y. Li, and W. Yang, “A review on application of cerium-based oxides in gaseous pollutant purification,” Separation and Purification Technology, vol. 250, p. 117181, 2020.
[30] J. R. Rostrup-Nielsen, “Coking on nickel catalysts for steam reforming of hydrocarbons,” Journal of Catalysis, vol. 33, pp. 184–201, 1974.
[31] D. Wang et al., “Steam-assisted dry reforming of methane over a Ce-doped Ni/calcium aluminate catalyst enabling stable syngas production,” Fuel, vol. 418, p. 138766, 2026.
[32] O. Boudouard, “Recherches sur les équilibres chimiques,” Annales de Chimie et de Physique, vol. 24, p. 85, 1901.
[33] A. Shigarov, “Approximate calculation of the apparent reaction rate of methane steam reforming on an industrial nickel catalyst for time-efficient computations,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 177, p. 151469, 2025.
[34] D. Pashchenko, “Experimental investigation of reforming and flow characteristics of a steam methane reformer filled with nickel catalyst of various shapes,” Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 185, pp. 465–472, 2019.
[35] T. Conant, A. Karim, and A. Datye, “Coating of steam reforming catalysts in non-porous multi-channeled microreactors,” Catalysis today, vol. 125, pp. 11–15, 2007.
[36] C. Fukuhara, N. Sasahara, and A. Igarashi, “Catalytic properties of nickel catalysts, for methanol decomposition, on aluminum plate prepared by electroless plating,” Journal of the Japan Petroleum Institute, vol. 37, pp. 173–178, 1994.
[37] J. B. Hunter and G. McGuire, “Method and Apparatus for Catalytic Heat Exchange,” July 29, 1980.
[38] M. Jiang, M. Huang, and S. Wang, “Design of an anti-coking and long-lifetime CeO2–NiO–La2O3 catalyst for steam methane reforming,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 196, p. 152486, 2025.
[39] D. M. Bezerra et al., “Ni-Al2O3 supported on metallic 3D-printed monolith with TPMS structure applied in the dry and steam reforming of methane,” Materials Research Bulletin, p. 113855, 2025.
[40] F. Nicolini, M. Ambrosetti, A. Beretta, G. Groppi, and E. Tronconi, “Directly electrified SiSiC packed foam reactor for methane steam reforming: experimental study and model-based scaleup,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 206, p. 153393, 2026.
[41] E. Achenbach, E. Riensche, and G. Unverzagt, “Gas processing of SOFC plants,” presented at the 1st European solid oxide fuel cell conference, Lucerne, Switzerland, 1994.
[42] K. Barati and Y. Khojasteh-Salkuyeh, “Development and analysis of electrified combined reforming of methane and CO2 based on induction and resistance heating,” Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 347, p. 120585, 2026.
[43] V. Papkov and D. Pashchenko, “CFD-modeling of steam methane reforming via particle-resolved and pseudo-homogeneous models: comparative analysis with experimental verification,” Fuel, vol. 393, p. 134906, 2025.
[44] A. N. Allam, M. A. Nemitallah, M. A. Habib, N. A. Qasem, and A. S. Farooqi, “Enhancing hydrogen production in a porous reactor for the steam methane reforming: optimizing operating parameters and radiation heat transfer mechanism,” ASME Open Journal of Engineering, vol. 4, 2025.
[45] J. Wang, J. Yang, B. Sunden, and Q. Wang, “Hydraulic and heat transfer characteristics in structured packed beds with methane steam reforming reaction for energy storage,” International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 121, p. 105109, 2021.
[46] J. Wang, S. Wei, Q. Wang, and B. Sundén, “Transient numerical modeling and model predictive control of an industrial-scale steam methane reforming reactor,” international journal of hydrogen energy, vol. 46, pp. 15241–15256, 2021.
[47] V. Papkov, B. Zhang, H. Su, H. Chen, and D. Pashchenko, “Numerical modeling of laminar flow over a porous cylinder under endothermic steam methane reforming reaction,” International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, vol. 112, p. 109725, 2025.
[48] P. Hammer, A. Altman, and F. Eastep, “Validation of a discrete vortex method for low Reynolds number unsteady flows,” AIAA journal, vol. 52, pp. 643–649, 2014.
[49] A. Slaouti and P. K. Stansby, “Flow around two circular cylinders by the random-vortex method,” Journal of Fluids and Structures, vol. 6, pp. 641–670, 1992/11/01/ 1992, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-9746(92)90001-J.
[50] F. P. Incropera, D. P. Dewitt, T. L. Bergman, and A. S. Lavine, Principles of heat and mass transfer, Global edition. 8th ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2017.
[51] R. Gu, J. Ding, Y. Wang, Q. Yuan, W. Wang, and J. Lu, “Heat transfer and storage performance of steam methane reforming in tubular reactor with focused solar simulator,” Applied Energy, vol. 233, pp. 789–801, 2019.