ArticleScientific reports2026
Substrate-driven optimization of microfluidic aluminum-air fuel cells: a comparative study of glass fiber vs. cellulose paper.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microfluidic aluminium-air fuel cells (µA-aFCs) offer attractive low-cost, compact, and environmentally benign power sources for portable and off-grid electronics. Their performance is strongly governed by electrolyte transport within the paper-based microfluidic channel. Here we demonstrate that the performance of µAl-aFCs can be significantly improved by replacing conventional cellulose (Whatman #1) electrolyte substrates with glass fiber (GF) paper. Owing to its more open fibrous network, accelerated capillary flow, and improved chemical stability under alkaline conditions, GF paper enables more efficient electrolyte replenishment to the cathode and facilitates ionic transport within the device. Using KOH and NaOH electrolytes ranging from 0.5 to 5 M, electrochemical polarization, impedance, and discharge characteristics were evaluated as a function of substrate type and electrolyte concentration. The optimal configuration, consisting of GF paper and 3.5 M KOH, produced a peak power density of 72.89 ± 1.66 mW/cm² and a maximum current density of 143.76 ± 1.14 mA/cm², nearly double that obtained with Whatman #1 substrates. Impedance analysis indicates reduced ohmic and diffusion-related losses at intermediate electrolyte concentrations, while galvanostatic discharge tests demonstrate stable operation under constant load. These findings highlight substrate engineering using GF paper as a simple materials-based strategy for enhancing the performance of microfluidic Al-air fuel cells.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.