Category Archives: heat sink clip

Three questions an engineer should ask prior to using thermal epoxy for their heat sinks

We’ve seen a big uptick in use of epoxy by our customers here at ATS. To our engineers that is alarming. While thermal epoxy initially appears to be a good solution for attaching a heat sink to a chip, accomplishing both the attachment and the thermal interface material in one “quick” glue application design engineers and manufacturing engineers should stop and ask themselves the following three questions before deciding to move ahead.

(1) Does it have to be glued?
Many times glue looks like the easy answer since its generally cost-effective and can be easily applied. But the question “does it have to be clued” really stops you short to make you examine potential alternatives. Don’t forget, thermal epoxy can expire and lose it’s properties.

(2) Is the perceived cost/time savings in assembly worth the actual cost of rework?
Many times thermal epoxy is a quick default choice, “just glue it on” has the sound of a quick solution that should work in average applications.  But that’s not the case.While it looks easy, thermal epoxy requires consistent application to the semiconductor the heat sink is being glues onto. To get that consistent application can require some training (a “soft” cost). But the real caution is the rework. No one “expects” reworks but reworking a company’s computer boards is reality. And with thermal epoxy being used for your heat sinks the rework requires either hot air guns (an additional expense) or destruction of the components under the heat sink. The cost of the rework may exceed the cost savings of using epoxy. Don’t forget the cost of  using thermal epoxy for your heat sinks includes training on how to use epoxy, special equipment to remove epoxied heat sinks and the cost of the material (which has a shelf life and many times must be refrigerated).

(3) Is epoxy being chosen to secure your heatsink?
While the epoxy bond is secure, it’s not foolproof. In fact ATS has seen many epoxied heat sinks that fell off during shock and vibe testing. What generally happens is that heat will weaken the epoxy mechanical bond then, when a strong shock or other mechanical stress is applied, the weakened bond with break, leaving your heat sink in free fall and your semiconductors overheating.

Want some alternatives? Check out our blog post series,

How to choose a heat sink attachment method to secure your heat sink and for optimal heat transfer Part 1

How to choose a heat sink attachment method to secure your heat sink and for optimal heat transfer Part 2

ATS maxiGRIP is flame retardent and our engineers prove it on video!

From time to time ATS engineers are asked if maxiGRIP, our patented heat sink attach technology that allow phase change interface material to be properly used, can resist  high heat.

Would ATS design something that didn’t pass every possible, necessary rating – never.  We can’t bring ourselves to design it poorly.  We know that thermal management is not just an afterthought and that it can make or break a system performance.

So, to prove our point, we’ve produced this short video on maxiGRIP and a simple flame test.  It’s a simple video of what happens when you use heat stress maxiGRIP.  Enjoy!  I think you can guess the outcome: .

Click to our link to buy your own heatsinks with maxiGRIP by visiting our maxiFLOW/maxiGRIP product page at qats.com

Intel’s nano-technology breakthrough for heat sinks has R&D promise but real-world applications are in the future; An ATS thermal management technology analysis

Just last week, Intel Corporation (Santa Clara, CA) earned U.S. Patent 7,704,791 for packaging of integrated circuits with carbon nanotube arrays to enhance heat dissipation through a thermal interface.

On the surface of it, this sounds like an exciting development in thermal management and heat sink invention, as noted in the article written by Alton Parrish on the news site “Before It’s News“:

According to inventors Valery M. Dubin and Thomas S. Dory a layer of metal is formed on a backside of a semiconductor wafer. Then, a porous layer is formed on the metal layer. A barrier layer of the porous layer at the bottom of the pores is thinned down. Then, a catalyst is deposited at the bottom of the pores. Carbon nanotubes are then grown in the pores. Another layer of metal is then formed over the porous layer and the carbon nanotubes. The semiconductor wafer is then separated into microelectronic dies. The dies are bonded to a semiconductor substrate, a heat spreader is placed on top of the die, and a semiconductor package resulting from such assembly is sealed. A thermal interface is formed on the top of the heat spreader. Then a heat sink is placed on top of the thermal interface.

Nano-carbon tube based materials have promised a revolution in thermal interface material technology but have never really delivered. In fact, many of us in thermal engineering have been anxiously awaiting a breakthrough development using nano-technology.
Nano-carbon tube technology has a lot of promise to solve the age old problem of contact resistance. The promise of nano-technology includes a few approaches from growing it on the semiconductor chip and eliminating TIM1 to growing it on the backside of the heat sink and minimizing or eliminating TIM2.

Unfortunately, many of these venture funded companies are no longer in business as the technologies maturation and commercialization simply hasn’t been there. From our vantage point as thermal scientists and engineers at ATS, nano-materials are an attractive proposition in certain university or corporate laboratories; with funding you can experiment and see if these technologies lead someplace. However, the real world issues of production in volume, sustaining production quality, cost, application and the biggest of all – the environmental hazard (nano-carbon tube has similar characteristics as asbestos) continue to create barriers to the real world utility of nano-carbon tube materials. While being a fascinating material to work with, the widespread, real world applications are limited at this juncture of technology life cycle and perhaps for the foreseeable future.

Perhaps most useful to the thermal management industry and to real world thermal engineering problems would be a comparison between nano-material based heat sinks and Aluminum or Copper; especially on a cost performance basis. ATS did a comparison between three geometrically identical heat sinks made of Copper, Aluminum and High-performance Graphite (though not nano-tube) and we did not see any difference. Surprisingly, the only advantage that high-performance Graphite offered was its light-weight, but, thermally and mechanically it was the worst (readers may download a copy of our study at ECNMag.com at this link: “Comparing the Impact of Different Heat Sink Materials on Cooling Performance“).

If we extrapolate our concerns and findings in our study to a heat sink made of nano-carbon tube material, (laying aside environmental factors and poor performance as nano-carbon tubes are isotropic – heat goes only in one direction), cost is a concern. Today’s electronics’ market is highly cost sensitive to their thermal development budget on a given project. Also, RoHS compliance is mandatory and studies are continuing on the health impact of nano-technology materials. Such work may not yield products for another five to 10 years. For the latest in the U.S. National Initiative in nano-scale technology, please visit the NNI’s 2011 Budget Supplement and Annual Report.

ATS applauds Intel for thinking out of the box and trying to create new ways of approaching the issue of thermal management. Semiconductor companies such as Intel who see themselves as part of the solution to thermal management are welcomed as fellow travellers to cooler and more reliable electronics.

Does thermal grease used for heat sinks have a long term reliability risk? An ATS Thermal Labs White Paper

Thermal Grease used as thermal interface material for heat sinks is perhaps the best material today. It’s relatively cost effective and just plain works. But, as in all thermal management products, it’s not perfect and there are drawbacks that have to be considered.

In ATS Thermal Labs latest white paper, we talk about those drawbacks an in particular if there are issues of long term reliability in using thermal grease as a thermal interface material. The implications are very important as they will affect your electronic equipments MTBF. You can get a copy by clicking to this link, “Long Term Thermal Grease Reliability