## 3 Results  
### Catalyst Arrangement and Reaction Performance Investigation for Methanol Catalytic Combustion  
Figure 3 shows a diagram of a methanol combustor with different catalyst arrangements. Here, the 5% Pt content of the Pt/Al\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\) catalyst was coated through an adhesive PVA on a nickel foam with 50 ppi and dimensions of 5 mm \(\times\) 5 mm \(\times\) 10 mm. To achieve a better temperature uniformity for high reformer performance, there are three different arrangements of the catalyst in the burners with a gradient between entrance and exhaust region as 50/50, 40/60, and 30/70, respectively, as shown in Figure 3. The 50/50-type structure employs a uniform arrangement of the catalyst. The 40/60-type structure slightly reduces the number of catalysts at the combustor inlet and gradually increases it towards the outlet. The 30/70-type structure, compared to the 40/60-type structure, significantly reduces the number of catalysts at the inlet and concentrates them more towards the combustor outlet.  
The reaction performance of the catalytic combustors with different catalyst arrangements was studied under a fixed 9000 sccm air flow and a 1.6 mL/min methanol consumption rate. Figure 4 shows the infrared thermography of methanol combustion using catalytic combustors with different catalyst arrangements. Compared to the 50/50-type and 40/60-type, the 30/70-type demonstrated not only a more uniform temperature distribution but also a larger high temperature coverage area located at the center of the burner, suggesting a more uniform and more efficient heat source for heating up the reformer.  
Figure 3: Structural diagram of catalytic combustor with different catalyst arrangement designs: 50/50-type (**left**); 40/60-type (**middle**); 30/70-type (**right**).  
Figure 2: Experiment setup of methanol combustion test.  
In addition to Infrared thermography for qualitatively verifying the temperature distribution among the burners, there are also six thermal couples arranged for temperature monitoring to the burner, as per the locations shown in Figure 5a. Figure 5b-d shows the thermal distribution on the combustion reaction chamber plate with a fixed methanol flow rate of 1.6 mL/min and 9000 sccm under different catalyst arrangements (50/50 type, 40/60 type, and 30/70 type). Compared to 50/50 type and 40/60 type supports, the 30/70 type exhibited a lower maximum temperature difference (\(\triangle\)T\({}_{\text{max}}\)) among six locations on the combustion reaction chamber plate. The \(\triangle\)T\({}_{\text{max}}\) values for 50/50 type, 40/60 type, and 30/70 types were measured as 48.2 \({}^{\circ}\)C, 38.3 \({}^{\circ}\)C, and 25.8 \({}^{\circ}\)C, respectively. Compared to the 50/50 type structure (Figure 5e), the \(\triangle\)T\({}_{\text{max}}\) of the 30/70 type support was reduced by 22.4 \({}^{\circ}\)C. In Figure 5b-d, it can also be observed that the startup times for the 50/50 type, 40/60 type, and 30/70 type are 35 min, 25 min, and 14 min, respectively. Compared to the 50/50 type structure, the startup time for the 30/70 type was shortened by 21 min. These comparisons verify that using the 30/70 type catalyst can effectively decrease both the temperature difference and startup time on the combustion reaction chamber plate, thus suggest a more efficient heat source for supporting reformers to achieve better performance.  
Figure 4: Infrared thermography of methanol burners with different catalyst arrangements.  
Figure 5: _Cont._