Optimization of the performance of a double-chamber microbial fuel cell through factorial design of experiments and response surface methodology

Fuel ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 150 ◽  
pp. 434-440 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Madani ◽  
Reza Gheshlaghi ◽  
Mahmood Akhavan Mahdavi ◽  
Mahdieh Sobhani ◽  
Ali Elkamel
2018 ◽  
Vol 402 ◽  
pp. 402-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcelinus Christwardana ◽  
Domenico Frattini ◽  
Grazia Accardo ◽  
Sung Pil Yoon ◽  
Yongchai Kwon

2018 ◽  
Vol 225 ◽  
pp. 242-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Amirul Islam ◽  
Huei Ruey Ong ◽  
Baranitharan Ethiraj ◽  
Chin Kui Cheng ◽  
Md Maksudur Rahman Khan

Catalysts ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. 1202
Author(s):  
Muhammad Nihal Naseer ◽  
Asad A. Zaidi ◽  
Hamdullah Khan ◽  
Sagar Kumar ◽  
Muhammad Taha bin Owais ◽  
...  

Microbial fuel cell, as a promising technology for simultaneous power production and waste treatment, has received a great deal of attention in recent years; however, generation of a relatively low power density is the main limitation towards its commercial application. This study contributes toward the optimization, in terms of maximization, of the power density of a microbial fuel cell by employing response surface methodology, coupled with central composite design. For this optimization study, the interactive effect of three independent parameters, namely (i) acetate concentration in the influent of anodic chamber; (ii) fuel feed flow rate in anodic chamber; and (iii) oxygen concentration in the influent of cathodic chamber, have been analyzed for a two-chamber microbial fuel cell, and the optimum conditions have been identified. The optimum value of power density was observed at an acetate concentration, a fuel feed flow rate, and an oxygen concentration value of 2.60 mol m−3, 0.0 m3, and 1.00 mol m−3, respectively. The results show the achievement of a power density of 3.425 W m−2, which is significant considering the available literature. Additionally, a statistical model has also been developed that correlates the three independent factors to the power density. For this model, R2, adjusted R2, and predicted R2 were 0.839, 0.807, and 0.703, respectively. The fact that there is only a 3.8% error in the actual and adjusted R2 demonstrates that the proposed model is statistically significant.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document