N Module voltage at max energy point and reference situations Module current at max energy point and reference conditions DMT-dC Phosphoramidite medchemexpress temperature coefficient of Isc at (ref. situation) Temperature coefficient of voc (ref. condition) Module temperature at NOCT Ambient temperature at NOCT Cell operative pressure Cell region Number of cells in series Quantity of stacks in parallel Minimum power allowed to SOEC Maximum energy permitted to SOEC Minimum power permitted from SOFC Maximum power allowed from SOFC Rated fuel cell/electrolyzer capacity Tank volume Maximum tank stress Compressor isentropic efficiency Inverter/Regulator efficiency Worth 1.609 50 2 100 8.94 37.3 298 1000 30.1 eight.64 0.0004 -0.003 319 293 1 87.7 eight 50 13.15 48.23 ten.52 36.83 45/50 1 200 0.80 0.96 Unit m2 kW A V K W/m2 V A 1/K K bar cm2 kW kW kW kW kW m3 bar -PV PANELH2 storage Compressor Inverter5. Results and Discussion In this section, the results of both the SOC model validation against experimental data plus the dynamic simulation of your hybrid system are presented and discussed. Subsequently, a parametric evaluation of your H2 tank is proposed, plus the optimal configuration is also discussed. 5.1. SOC Model Validation The developed model was successfully validated by signifies of experimental information offered by the identical authors [27]. In particular, the model proposes the simulation of a 50-stack planar cell designed and made by Tops in 2014 made of Nickel/Yttria stabilized DNQX disodium salt Epigenetics Zirconia (Ni/YSZ). Boundary operating conditions are reported in Table 3.Table 3. Feeding condition for the experimental fuel cell [27]. Feeding Gas Anode Chatode H2 /H2 O (500) O2 (100) Flow Price [sccm/cm2 ] 12.44 five.70 Temperature [K] 1033As reported in this table, the anode is fed by a 50/50 mixture of hydrogen and steam whereas the cathode is fed by pure O2 , when the cell operates in SOFC mode. Figure five shows the comparison amongst the simulated I curve from the cell along with the experimental operating data, each for the electrolyzer and the fuel cell.Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW12 ofEnergies 2021, 14,11 the Figure five shows the comparison between the simulated I curve from the cell andof 20 experimental operating data, each for the electrolyzer and also the fuel cell.Figure five. Comparison in between numerical and experimental information for the fuel cell mode (a) along with the Figure five. Comparison experimental the fuel cell mode (a) plus the electrolyzer mode (b). electrolyzer mode (b).There is a really very good agreement amongst the experimental information and also the polarization There is an extremely fantastic agreement in between the experimental information plus the polarization curves obtained by the model, for both configurations with the cell. The deviation among curves obtained by the model, for both configurations in the cell. The deviation in between simulations and experiments is often below 2 . The reported curves are also consistent simulations and experiments is generally below 2 . The reported curves are also constant using the previously described model. In reality, for the fuel cell, the voltage decreases in the with all the previously described model. Actually, for the fuel cell, the voltage decreases inside the case of larger present densities, whereas the opposite trend is detected for the electrolyzer. case of higher present densities, whereas the opposite trend is detected for the electrolyzer. Figure 6 shows the cell temperature as a function from the cell present density, icell , for Figure six shows the cell temperature as a function in the cell present density, icell for di.