DOI: 10.1002/fuce.

200900104

M. Zunic1,2, L. Chevallier1,4, E. Di Bartolomeo1*, A. DEpifanio1, S. Licoccia1 and

E. Traversa1,3
1

Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Chimiche, Universit di Roma Tor Vergata, Via della Ricerca Scientifica, 00133 Rome, Italy
Institute for Multidisciplinary Research, Kneza Viseslava 1a, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
3
International Research Center for Materials Nanoarchitectonics (MANA), National Institute for Materials Science (NIMS), 1-1 Namiki,
Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0044, Japan
4
Present address: Institut Charles Gerhardt Montpellier, UMR 5253, Laboratoire des Agrgats, Interfaces et Matriaux pour l'Energie,
Universit Montpellier II, 34095 Montpellier Cedex 5, France.
2

Received May 19, 2009; accepted June 25, 2010

Abstract
Intermediate temperature solid oxide fuel cells (IT-SOFCs)
were
fabricated
depositing
proton
conducting
BaCe0.9Y0.1O3x (BCY10) thick films on cermet substrates
made of nickel oxideyttrium doped barium cerate
(NiOBCY10) using electrophoretic deposition (EPD) technique. The influence of the EPD parameters on the microstructure and electrical properties of BCY10 thick films was
investigated. Deposited BCY10 thick films together with
green anode substrates were co-sintered in a single heating
treatment at 1,550 C for 2 h to obtain dense electrolyte and
suitably porous anodes. The half-cells were characterised by
field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) and
by X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis. A composite cathode
specifically developed for BCY electrolytes, made of

1 Introduction
Solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs) based on proton conductor
electrolytes are emerging candidates for intermediate temperature (IT) energy production. Perovskite-type oxides such as
doped barium cerate, doped barium zirconate and their solid
solutions exhibit high protonic conductivity and low activation energy in a temperature range below 700 C [16].
Recently, several papers showed some first promising results
of protonic fuel cells fabricated by using different electrolyte
deposition techniques, such as screen printing [7, 8], spin
coating [9], co-pressing [10] and suspension spray [1113].

FUEL CELLS 11, 2011, No. 2, 165171

La0.8Sr0.2Co0.8Fe0.2O3(LSCF, mixed oxygen-ion/electronic

conductor) and BaCe0.9Yb0.1O3d (10YbBC, mixed protonic/
electronic conductor), was used. Fuel cells were prepared by
slurry coating the composite cathode on the co-sintered halfcells. Fuel cell tests and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) were performed in the 550700 C temperature
range. A maximum power density of 296 mW cm2 was
achieved at 700 C for electrolyte deposited at 60 V for
1 min.
Keywords: Ceramic Membrane, Electrochemical Impedance
Spectroscopy, Electrochemical Power Sources, EPD Technique, SOFC

Gastight thick films with a thickness varying between 10 and

65 lm were obtained and characterised.
Electrophoretic deposition (EPD) is a reliable deposition
method extensively used in different branches of materials
science, including carbon nanotube films [14, 15], preparation
of fiber reinforced ceramic matrix composites [16, 17], composite materials [18, 19] and laminated materials [20, 21]. The
major advantages of this deposition technique are the short

[*] Corresponding author, dibartolomeo@uniroma2.it

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

165

ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER

Anode Supported Protonic Solid Oxide

Fuel Cells Fabricated Using
Electrophoretic Deposition

ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER

Zunic et al.: Anode Supported Protonic Solid Oxide Fuel Cells Fabricated Using Electrophoretic Deposition
deposition time, use of simple equipment, low cost and suitability for mass production.
EPD has also been used in SOFC technology for deposition
of oxygen ion conductor electrolyte thick films on anode or
cathode porous substrates [2228]. To the best of our knowledge, apart from our preliminary study [29], EPD was never
used for the deposition of proton conductor electrolyte thick
films. EPD and is still not a widespread method in the field of
SOFCs. The main problems that must be solved for successful
EPD of dense, uniform and crack-free thick-films are the
choice of the suspension medium, which can stabilise the dispersion of electrically charged particles, the optimisation of
the substrate conductivity properties and the deposition parameters. Different organic solvents have been tested as suspending media, like benzene, ketones or iodine added acetone [3032]. Thin graphite layers [24] or metallic substrates
[23] have been used as conductive substrates for deposition,
even though they are not appropriate for SOFC applications.
Typical green or pre-sintered NiO-YSZ substrates for anodesupported SOFCs are not conductive at room temperature.
Nevertheless, it is possible to achieve a green anode conductivity value adequate for EPD deposition optimising their
microstructure and porosity [30] or adding graphite that acts
both as pore former and electronic conductor [27, 28, 32, 33].
In this study we used EPD for fabrication of SOFCs based
on proton conductor electrolytes, in a continuation of
research efforts made by the group in this field [29, 34, 35].
For this purpose, we assembled previously developed fuel
cell components. Dense films of BaCe0.9Y0.1O3x (BCY10) proton conductor were deposited on green nickel oxideyttrium
doped barium cerate (NiOBCY10) substrate [36]. The optimised co-sintering temperature (T = 1,550 C) allowed to get
homogeneous, dense electrolyte BCY10 thick films coupled to
anodes with suitable porosity [29]. Composite powders with
La0.8Sr0.2Co0.8Fe0.2O3 (LSCF)BaCe0.9Yb0.1O3d (10YbBC) composition, specifically developed for BCY proton conductor
electrolyte [37, 38], were used as cathodes, where LSCF is a
mixed oxygen ion-electronic conductor and 10YbBC a mixed
protonic/electronic conductor. The previously fabricated prototypes were analysed in fuel cell tests obtaining a max power
density of 174 mW cm2 at 650 C [29].
We have now extended our studies and investigated the
influence of deposition voltage on the properties of the proton conducting electrolyte thick films with the aim of improving the fuel cell performance.

2 Experimental
Protonic conductor BCY10 oxide was prepared by using
the citratenitrate auto-combustion method [39]. After calcination at 1,000 C for 10 h, BCY10 powders showed a single
orthorhombic phase (JCPDS 81-1386) and a sponge-like
microstructure with an average grain size of less than
100 nm, as reported elsewhere [29].

166

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

Green anode substrates for EPD were prepared as previously reported [36]. The thickness of anode substrates
before sintering was around 0.7 mm. To improve film adhesion, all the substrates were prepared with the same procedure by polishing them prior to EPD. The suspension for
EPD was made up of BCY10 powders and iodine-dissolved
acetylacetone (Aldrich). The extent of powder loading of
BCY10 powder in I2/Acetylacetone solution was 8 g l1. The
reaction between I2 and acetylacetone results in positively
charging the BCY10 particles and improving the suspension
conductivity. All details of the EPD preparation are given in a
previous paper [29]. Cathodic EPD processes were carried
out varying the deposition voltage from 30 to 60 V by using a
high voltage dc power supply unit (BIO RAD, PowerPack
1000), fixing the deposition time at 1 min. The samples were
covered with a small beaker with the aim to prevent fast drying. When sample was uncovered, the duration of drying was
less than 1 min. With cover, the duration of drying was about
30 min. The slow drying at room temperature avoids the formation of cracks [40]. Then, the samples were pre-fired at
1,000 C to burn all the graphite powder and finally sintered
at 1,550 C for 2 h, using a heating ramp of 3K min1. Barium
evaporation from the deposited films at temperatures above
1,200 C was prevented by covering the BCY10 thick films
with a BCY10 pellet. After sintering, the final diameter of the
deposited electrolyte was 7.95 mm (the shrinkage was 27.7%)
and the half-cell thickness was 0.45 mm.
X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis (Philips XPert 500),
(FE-SEM Leo Supra 1250) observations and energy dispersion
X-ray (EDAX, INCA Energy 300) microanalysis were used to
analyse the crystal structure, morphology and chemical composition of the sintered thick films and anodes.
Prototype fuel cells were prepared by slurry coating of
La0.8Sr0.2Co0.8Fe0.2O3(LSCF)BaCe0.9Yb0.1O3d (10YbBC) powders in weight ratio 1:1 as cathode materials onto BCY10
dense films, using a commercial screen-printing oil, and then
firing at 1,100 C for 2 h. The cathodes were deposited after
sticking on the electrolyte scotch tape with circular hole as a
mould, using a blade for levelling the deposition. The thickness of scotch tape was 0.09 mm and the hole diameter was
6 mm (A = 0.283 cm2), which was smaller than the electrolyte
diameter (7.95 mm). We choose a smaller diameter to avoid a
short circuit contact between cathode and anode during the
cathode painting procedure. This deposition allowed reproducible uniform cathodes. After firing at 1,100 C for 2 h the
thickness of the cathode was measured using SEM. The thickness of the cathode after firing was 80 5 lm. Gold wires
were fixed with a drop of platinum paste (Engelhard-Clal) on
the top of each electrode and used as current collectors. For
the fuel cell tests, the samples were mounted in a vertical setup at the end of an alumina tube using a gas tight ceramic
paste seal (Aremco, 552). The anode was exposed to wet
hydrogen (3 vol.-% H2O) while the cathode was exposed to
ambient air.
The electrochemical measurements were performed using
a multichannel potentiostat VMP3. The impedance was mea-

www.fuelcells.wiley-vch.de

FUEL CELLS 11, 2011, No. 2, 165171

Zunic et al.: Anode Supported Protonic Solid Oxide Fuel Cells Fabricated Using Electrophoretic Deposition

3 Results and Discussion

At variance with what reported for many EPD processes
where the addition of suitable additives was required [25,
41], no binders or dispersing agents were used in our investigation to avoid possible contamination of the electrolyte.
Table 1 reports the EPD working conditions for BCY10
deposition and the labels of the obtained half-cells.
Figure 1 shows the SEM micrographs (cross-sections) of
the co-sintered EPD1, EPD2, EPD3 and EPD4 films on the
anode substrate. In all cases, the BCY10 films were dense and
without cracks, and the anodeelectrolyte interface showed a
good interfacial adhesion. The thickness of anode after sintering was 0.45 mm. The anode macroporosity required for gas
permeation a good interconnection between the two phases
were clearly noticeable [36].
Figure 2 shows the plot of the thickness values as a function of the applied voltage. Increasing the deposition voltage
from 30 to 60 V reflected into a linear increase in the electrolyte film thickness from 5.2 to 9.5 lm, in agreement with literature data on EPD for other materials [42].
Figure 3 shows the SEM micrographs (top views) of the
EPD1, EPD2, EPD3 and EPD4 samples. Sintered grains with
size in the 510 lm range were obtained for all the BCY10
Table 1 EPD parameters for BCY10 deposition on NiOBCY10 anodes.
Deposition time was set at 1 min.
Name

Voltage (V)

Measured current (mA)

EPD 1
EPD 2
EPD 3
EPD 4

30
40
50
60

2.4
3.1
3.7
4.0

0.9
1.1
1.4
1.9

Fig. 1 SEM micrographs of the cross-sections of the EPD 1 (a), EPD 2 [29]
(b), EPD 3 (c) and EPD 4 (d) BCY10 films on NiOBCY10 anode substrates, after co-sintering at 1,550 C for 2 h.

FUEL CELLS 11, 2011, No. 2, 165171

www.fuelcells.wiley-vch.de

Fig. 2 Linear dependence of the BCY10 film thickness as a function of the

EPD voltage.

Fig. 3 SEM micrographs (top view) of the EPD 1 (a), EPD 2 (b), EPD 3 (c)
and EPD 4 (d) films after co-sintering at 1,550 C for 2 h.

films. The EPD deposition voltage did not significantly affect

the shape and dimension of the BCY10 grains but affected the
film porosity. For samples prepared with low deposition voltage (30 or 40 V), an incomplete and non-uniform deposition
was obtained, leading to the formation of pores during the
sintering process. The samples prepared at higher voltages
(50 and 60 V) were characterised by slightly thicker, smoother
and denser deposited films. Thus, the lower is the deposition
voltage, the larger is the porosity with larger pinholes and
micropores. This can be explained by the improved particle
packing induced by the larger voltages.
XRD analysis of top and bottom of each half-cell was performed on all the prepared samples. In agreement with what
reported in a previous paper [29], the dense BCY10 electrolyte
films showed the typical orthorhombic phase confirming that
no significant barium evaporation or degradation of BCY10
film occurred during the sintering process. As far as the
anode substrates were concerned, NiO (JCPDS 74-1299) and
BCY10 (JCPDS 81-1386) phases were observed, without the
appearance of any secondary phase. These results were verified for all the sintered thick films deposited with different
voltages.

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

167

ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER

sured in the frequency range from 500 kHz to 0.1 Hz with the
signal amplitude of 10 mV under open-circuit condition. The
cell was equilibrated at open-circuit for about 10 min before
EIS measurements. Hydrogenair fuel cell test experiments
were carried out in the temperature range from 550 to 700 C.

ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER

Zunic et al.: Anode Supported Protonic Solid Oxide Fuel Cells Fabricated Using Electrophoretic Deposition
The results of all the half-cell characterisation converge in
demonstrating that the co-sintering process of the EPD electrolyte film deposited on the green anodic substrate allowed
the fabrication of homogeneous, fully dense BCY10 thick
films, preserving a suitable porosity within the anode substrates, despite the high sintering temperature. Higher voltages seem to ensure the fabrication of films of better quality.
Upon slurry coating deposition of LSCF10YbBC cathodes,
prototype fuel cells were thus fabricated and labelled as the
following:
Ni-BCY10/EPD 1/LSCF10YbBC (FC1).
Ni-BCY10/EPD 2/LSCF10YbBC (FC2).
Ni-BCY10/EPD 3/LSCF10YbBC (FC3).
Ni-BCY10/EPD 4/LSCF10YbBC (FC4).
Stable and reproducible fuel cell test measurements were
possible only on FC3 and FC4 cells, characterised by electrolyte film thickness of 7.8 and 9.5 lm, respectively. On the
other hand, as it could be expected, for fuel cells FC1 and
FC2, with 5.2 and 6.2 lm thick BCY10 electrolytes, respectively, steady electrical measurements were not possible
because the presence of pores and pinholes in their microstructure did not allow gas tightness.
Figure 4 shows the IV and power density output curves
of FC3 and FC4 samples, obtained exposing the anode to wet
H2 (3 vol.-% H2O) and the cathode to ambient air in the temperature range between 550 and 700 C. Table 2 reports the
Nernst potential, measured values of open-circuit voltage
(OCV) and maximum power density values measured for
FC3 and FC4 samples, together with electrode polarisation
resistance (Rpol), ohmic resistance (Rohm) and total resistance
(Rtot), as derived from EIS measurements. For both fuel cells
the measured OCV values at different temperatures were a
little lower but still close to the theoretical values. The meaFig. 4 IV curves and power density output of the FC3 (a) and FC4 (b)
sured OCV values of the FC4 sample were slightly larger than
cells, measured at different temperatures in hydrogenair fuel cell experiments.
that of the FC3 cell. The lower measured OCV values of the
FC3 sample can be attributed to the presence of some small
pinholes in the deposited thick film that does not fully prethan 200 mW cm2. Most likely, the larger Rohm and Rpol valvent gas leakage through the BCY10 electrolyte, as shown in
ues and the greater temperature dependence of FC3 (as
Figure 3c. The absence of pinholes in the EPD4 thick film,
reported in Table 2) reflect problems at electrolyte/electrode
and thus its full density, ensured the larger measured values
interfaces. The different behaviour of the two samples might
of OCV values of the FC4 cell. For both tested fuel cells, the
be explained by an incomplete adhesion of the electrodes to
measured OCV values decreased with increasing the temperature up to 650 C. The larger decrease in the measured OCV
the electrolyte for the FC3 sample. This might justify the largvalues observed at 700 C could be correlated with the occurer improvement in the power output with the temperature:
rence of an electronic contribution to the total conductivity of
adhesion improved with increasing the temperature, making
BCY10 at that temperature [3, 43, 44].
smaller the difference with the FC4 sample performance.
Comparing the power densities of the FC3 and
FC4 cells at all the investigated temperatures, FC4
Table 2 Results of the fuel cell tests for samples FC3 and FC4.
showed a better performance than FC3, as expected
Samples
FC3
FC4
according to their microstructures. For FC4, a maxiTemperature (C)
550
600
650
700
550
600
650
700
2
mum power density of 296 mW cm was obtained
Nernst potential (V)
1.14
1.13
1.12
1.11
1.14
1.13
1.12
1.11
at 700 C. Moreover, decreasing the temperature to
OCV (measured) (V)
1.10
1.09
1.05
1.02
1.11
1.10
1.07
1.05
550 C, the power output reduction was smaller for
P (mW cm2)
92
139
208
254
203
242
275
296
2.61
1.93
1.26
1.01
1.11
1.02
0.92
0.90
Rohm (X cm2)
FC4 cell than for FC3. Thus, FC4 showed promising
3.79
1.22
0.69
0.20
1.44
0.82
0.35
0.22
Rpol (X cm2)
performance even at temperatures between 550 and
6.40
3.15
1.95
1.21
2.55
1.84
1.27
1.12
Rtot (X cm2)
650 C. At 550 C the power output was still larger

168

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

www.fuelcells.wiley-vch.de

FUEL CELLS 11, 2011, No. 2, 165171

Zunic et al.: Anode Supported Protonic Solid Oxide Fuel Cells Fabricated Using Electrophoretic Deposition

FUEL CELLS 11, 2011, No. 2, 165171

www.fuelcells.wiley-vch.de

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

169

ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER

The performance of the developed

(a)
cells represent an improvement with
respect to literature data reported for
proton conducting fuel cell based on
doped barium cerate thick films (having
thickness of about 10 lm) deposited by
using other deposition techniques onto
the same porous anode and using composite cathodes with similar composition
[7, 8]. Moreover, an increase in the power
output of about 60% with respect to our
previously reported results [29] was observed, showing that the optimisation of
the prototype fuel cell fabrication procedure was effective in boosting the fuel
cell performance. Thus, EPD seems to be
a particularly suitable technique for the
fabrication of highly performing proton
conductor thick films for SOFCs.
During cell tests measurements at different temperatures, EIS measurements
were carried out under open circuit voltage on the FC3 and FC4 samples. Figure 5 shows the complex impedance
(b)
plane plots for FC3 (Figure 5a) and
FC4 samples (Figure 5b) in wet H2
(60 cm3 min1) and ambient air at the
cathode side, measured in the 550
700 C temperature range. The typical
electrode polarisation resistance (Rpol)
and ohmic resistance (Rohm) of the cells
were obtained as the difference between
the low and high frequency real axis
intercepts in the complex impedance
plane plot, and the high frequency real
axis intercept, respectively [45]. Total cell
resistance (Rtot) is defined as the low frequency real axis intercept. The inset in
Figure 5a and b reports the EIS measurements at 650 C and clearly shows a larger arc at low frequencies and a smaller
arc at intermediate frequencies. The two
arcs indicate at least two different electrode processes that are also consistent
with the fact that both anode and cathode
behaviours are embedded in this feature.
All the measured data are reported in
Fig. 5 Complex impedance plane plots for FC3 (a) and FC4 (b) cells measured at different temTable 2 for samples FC3 and FC4. The
peratures in hydrogenair fuel cell experiments.
Rohm values of FC3 are comparable with
those that can be found in the literature,
while Rohm values of FC4 are smaller
[46]. The Rohm of FC3 is larger than the one of FC4 because of
electrolyte at 600 C is 1.12 103 S cm1, almost one order of
the presence of small pinholes in the electrolyte microstrucmagnitude smaller than that of measured for bulk BCY10
ture. Moreover, it should be mentioned that if we make the
samples (102 S cm1 at 600 C). Besides the electrolyte resisassumption that the ohmic resistance of the cell mostly comes
tance, the ohmic resistance also includes the electronic resisfrom the electrolyte, the calculated conductivity of the FC4
tance of the electrodes and the interfacial resistance. Actually,

ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER

Zunic et al.: Anode Supported Protonic Solid Oxide Fuel Cells Fabricated Using Electrophoretic Deposition
the attached cathode is relatively thick (80 lm) and the anode
contains a large volume fraction of BCY10 (54 vol.-%) (to
ensure a good thermal compatibility between the substrate
and the deposited film), so their resistance (lattice plus grainboundary resistance) might be too large. Some future work
should be focused on improving the electronic conduction of
electrodes as well as reducing the contact resistance of thickfilm based SOFCs. The calculated values of Rpol for FC3 and
FC4 are comparable with literature data [13], even though
they are far larger than well-known cathode materials for
oxygen ion conductor oxides [47]. Thus, these results point
out that the development of highly performing electrodes, in
particular cathodes, still remains a big challenge.
Figure 6 shows the SEM cross-section micrograph of the
fuel cell FC4 after electrochemical measurements. No major
degradation effects were visible. The three materials components of the fuel cell are clearly identified. Both cathodeelectrolyte and the anodeelectrolyte interfaces showed good
interfacial adhesion. As said before, the EPD deposited
BCY10 thick film was fully dense, while the cathode showed
a porous microstructure and submicrometric grain size. The
anode confirmed its macroporosity necessary for fuel diffusion and continuous connections between Ni and BCY10
grains that assure uninterrupted pathways for electronic (Ni)
and ionic (BCY10) conduction in the anode pellet.

4 Conclusion
Anode supported protonic fuel cells were successfully fabricated using EPD. The influence of deposition voltage on the
microstructure and electrical properties of BCY10 electrolyte
thick-films was investigated. BCY10 films having thickness
smaller than 10 lm were successfully obtained on a green
NiOBCY10 composite anode. After co-sintering at 1,550 C,
dense electrolyte films were fabricated keeping a suitable porosity on the cermet anodes. The presence of porosity in the
electrolyte thick films was reduced by increasing the deposition voltage from 30 to 60 V, together with a simultaneous
increase in the film thickness from 5.2 to 9.5 lm. A fully
dense electrolyte, without any pores and pinholes, was
obtained for deposition voltage of 60 V and deposition time
of 1 min, which were chosen as the best EPD parameters.
Stable and reproducible hydrogenair fuel cell tests using a

Fig. 6 SEM micrograph (cross-section view) of the FC4 prototype cell after
the electrochemical measurements.

170

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

composite cathode based on commercial LSCF and synthesised BaCe0.9Yb0.1O3d were obtained for samples with electrolytes deposited using 60 V, measuring a maximum power
density of 296 mW cm2 at 700 C, showing that the modification of materials processing allowed an increase in the power
output of about 60% with respect to previously reported
results. Promising performances were also revealed at temperatures between 550 and 650 C. At 550 C the power output was still above 200 mW cm2. EIS measurements pointed
out that the performance of BCY10-based fuel cells were
mainly limited by the interfacial polarisation resistance.

Acknowledgements
This work was funded by the Ministry of University and
Research (MiUR) of Italy under the frame of the FISR project
Polymeric and ceramic fuel cells: System validation and
development of new materials, and of the PRIN project Protonic Conducting Ceramics for Fuel Cells.

References
[1] K. D. Kreuer, Solid State Ionics 1997, 97, 1.
[2] T. Norby, Y. Larring, Curr. Opin. Solid State Mater. Sci.
1997, 2, 593.
[3] K. D. Kreuer, Solid State Ionics 1999, 125, 285.
[4] K. D. Kreuer, S. Adams, W. Munch, A. Fuchs, U. Klock,
J. Maier, Solid State Ionics 2001, 145, 295.
[5] K. Katahira, Y. Kohchi, T. Shimura, H. Iwahara, Solid
State Ionics 2000, 139, 91.
[6] Z. Zhong, Solid State Ionics 2007, 178, 213.
[7] L. Bi, S. Zhang, B. Liu, S. Fang, C. Xia, W. Liu, J. Alloys
Compd. 2008, 473, 48.
[8] J. M. Serra, O. Buchler, W. A. Meulenberg, H. P. Buchkremer, J. Electrochem. Soc. 2007, 154, B334.
[9] M. Asamoto, H. Shirai, H. Yamaura, H. Yahiro, J. Eur.
Ceram. Soc. 2007, 27, 4229.
[10] L. Yang, C. Zuo, S. Wang, Z. Cheng, M. Liu, Adv. Mater.
2008, 20, 3280.
[11] B. Lin, S. Zhang, L. Zhang, L. Bi, H. Ding, X. Liu, J. Gao,
G. Meng, J. Power Sources 2008, 177, 330.
[12] L. Bi, S. Zhang, S. Fang, L. Zhang, K. Xie, C. Xia, W. Liu,
Electrochem. Commun. 2008, 10, 1005.
[13] L. Bi, S. Zhang, S. Fang, Z. Tao, R. Peng, W. Liu, Electrochem. Commun. 2008, 10, 1598.
[14] S. V. Mahajan, S. A. Hasan, J. Cho, M. S. P. Shaffer, A. R.
Boccaccini, J. H. Dickerson, Nanotechnology 2008, 19,
195301.
[15] J. Cho, K. Konopka, K. Rozniatowski, E. Garcia-Lecina,
M. S. P. Shaffer, A. R. Boccaccini, Carbon 2009, 47, 58.
[16] K. Yoshida, K. Matsukawa, T. Yano, J. Nucl. Mater. 2009,
386388, 643.
[17] J. S. Zheng, M. X. Wang, X. S. Zhang, Y. X. Wu, P. Li,
X. G. Zhou, W. K. Yuah, J. Power Sources 2008, 175, 211.

www.fuelcells.wiley-vch.de

FUEL CELLS 11, 2011, No. 2, 165171

Zunic et al.: Anode Supported Protonic Solid Oxide Fuel Cells Fabricated Using Electrophoretic Deposition
[33] K. Yamaji, H. Kishimoto, Y. Xiong, T. Horita, N. Sakai,
H. Yokokawa, Solid State Ionics 2004, 175, 165.
[34] A. DEpifanio, E. Fabbri, E. Di Bartolomeo, S. Licoccia,
E. Traversa, Fuel Cells 2008, 8, 69.
[35] E. Fabbri, D. Pergolesi, A. DEpifanio, E. Di Bartolomeo,
G. Balestrino, S. Licoccia, E. Traversa, Energy Environ.
Sci. 2008, 1, 355.
[36] L. Chevallier, M. Zunic, V. Esposito, E. Di Bartolomeo,
E. Traversa, Solid State Ionics 2009, 180, 715.
[37] E. Fabbri, T. Oh, S. Licoccia, E. Traversa, E. D. Wachsman, J. Electrochem. Soc. 2009, 156, B38.
[38] E. Fabbri, S. Licoccia, E. Traversa, E. D. Wachsman, Fuel
Cells 2009, 2, 128.
[39] F. Deganello, G. Marci, G. Deganello, J. Eur. Ceram. Soc.
2009, 29, 439.
[40] P. Sarkar, 1st International Conference on Electrophoretic
Deposition (Eds. A. R. Boccaccini, O. Van der Biest and
J. Talbot), Pennington, NJ, USA, 2002, p. 70.
[41] I. Zhitomirsky, A. Petric, J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 2002, 20,
2055.
[42] M. Matsuda, T. Hosomi, K. Murata, T. Fukui,
M. Miyake, J. Power Sources 2007, 165, 102.
[43] W. G. Coors, Solid State Ionics 2007, 178, 481.
[44] E. Fabbri, A. DEpifanio, E. Di Bartolomeo, S. Licoccia,
E. Traversa, Solid State Ionics 2008, 179, 558.
[45] V. Esposito, E. Traversa, E. D. Wachsman, J. Electrochem.
Soc. 2005, 152, A2300.
[46] C. D. Zuo, S. W. Zha, M. L. Liu, M. Hatano, M. Uchiyama, Adv. Mater. 2006, 18, 3318.
[47] C. R. Xia, M. L. Liu, Adv. Mater. 2002, 14, 521.

______________________

FUEL CELLS 11, 2011, No. 2, 165171

www.fuelcells.wiley-vch.de

2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

171

ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER

[18] S. Novak, K. Rade, K. Knig, A. R. Boccaccini, J. Eur.

Ceram. Soc. 2008, 28, 2801.
[19] J. Cho, S. Schaab, J. A. Roether, A. R. Boccaccini, J. Nanopart. Res. 2008, 10, 99.
[20] B. Ferrari, I. Santacruz, M. I. Nieto, R. Moreno, J. Eur.
Ceram. Soc. 2004, 24, 3073.
[21] Ch. You, D. L. Jiang, S. H. Tan, Ceram. Int. 2004, 30, 813.
[22] T. Ishihara, K. Sato, Y. Mizuhara, Y. Takita, Chem. Lett.
1992, 21, 943.
[23] T. Ishihara, K. Sato, Y. Takita, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 1996,
79, 913.
[24] R. N. Basu, C. A. Randall, M. J. Mayo, J. Am. Ceram. Soc.
2001, 84, 33.
[25] I. Zhitomirsky, A. Petric, J. Mater. Sci. 2004, 39, 825.
[26] J. Will, M. K. M. Hruschka, L. Gubler, L. J. Gauckler,
J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2002, 84, 328.
[27] G. Savo, A. Rainer, A. DEpifanio, S. Licoccia, E. Traversa, Solid Oxide Fuel Cells IX (SOFC IX) (Eds. S. C. Singhal
and J. Mizusaki), The Electrochemical Society, Pennington, NJ, USA, 2005, p. 1031.
[28] F. Bozza, R. Polini, E. Traversa, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2009,
92 (9), 1999.
[29] M. Zunic, L. Chevallier, F. Deganello, A. DEpifanio,
S. Licoccia, E. Di Bartolomeo, E. Traversa, J. Power
Sources 2009, 190, 417.
[30] L. Besra, M. Liu, Prog. Mater. Sci. 2007, 52, 1, and references therein.
[31] S. Okamura, T. Tsukamoto, N. Koura, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys.
1993, 32, 4182.
[32] F. Bozza, R. Polini, E. Traversa, Fuel Cells 2008, 8, 344.