Category Archives: thermal management

Announcing our ATS Electronics Cooling Webinars for Third Quarter of 2012

Posted on July 5, 2012 by | 1 comment

ATS, Advanced Thermal Solutions, Inc. will present technical webinars on electronic cooling topics in July, August and September 2012. Each of these free events will provide engineering-level training in a key area of modern thermal management.

Here are the different webinar topics and presentation times:

Using Thermal Interface Materials to Improve Heat Sink Thermal Performance

July 26, 2012 at 2:00 p.m. ET

To cool hotter components, engineers are using larger fans and heat sinks, and increasing surface areas. These hardware enhancements can add significantly to design costs. In many cases, cooling performance can be improved by using a higher performance interface material between the case and the heat sink. Participants will learn the importance of lowering thermal resistance using thermal interface materials, or TIMs, and the different kinds of TIMs available from the market.

Air Jet Impingement Cooling

August 23, 2012 at 2:00 p.m. ET

Ongoing increases in power in devices such as processors and IGBTs mean that higher capacity cooling methods are needed to remove excess heat. One such method is the jet impingement of a liquid or gas onto a surface on a continuous basis. Lab experiments at ATS have shown up to a 40% improvement in cooling achieved using this method. This webinar will explore jet impingement cooling theory, implementation and best practices.

LED Thermal Management in Commercial and Consumer Lighting Applications

September 27, 2012 at 2:00 p.m. ET

Excess heat directly affects both short-term and long-term LED performance. The short-term effects are color shift and reduced light output, while the long-term effect is accelerated lumen depreciation and thus shortened useful life. Participants will learn how to diagnose and solve thermal issues in consumer and commercial LED applications.

Each of these one-hour online tutorials will include detailed visuals, real world examples, instructions, definitions and references. Audience questions will be answered by the presenters during and after the presentation. One or more ATS PhD-level thermal engineers will be presenting live.

There is no cost to attend these ATS webinars, but virtual seating is limited. Registration is available online at http://www.qats.com, or by calling 1-781-949-2522.

http://qats.com/Training/Webinars/7.aspx

 

1 Comment

Posted in ATS News, heat sink, Heat Sinks, heat transfer, How To, LED, Liquid Cooling, Thermal, Thermal Interface Material, thermal management, Webinar

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Thermal Resistance and Component Temperature

Posted on June 26, 2012 by | 2 comments

To maintain operation, the heat must flow out of a semiconductor as such a rate as to ensure acceptable junction temperatures. This heat flow encounters resistance as it moves from the junction throughout the device package, much like electrons face resistance when flowing through a wire. In thermodynamic terms, this resistance is known as conduction resistance and consists of several parts. From the junction, heat can flow toward the case of the component, where a heat sink may be located. This is referred to as ÎJC, or junction to case thermal resistance. Heat can also flow away from the top surface of the component and into the board. This is known as junction to board resistance, or ΘJB.

Source: JESD51-2, Integrated Circuits Thermal Test Method – Natural Convection, JEDEC, March 1999.

ΘJB is defined as the temperature difference between the junction and the board divided by the power when the heat path is from junction to board only. To measure ΘJB, the top of the device is insulated and a cold plate is attached to the board edge (Figure 1). This is the true thermal resistance, which is the characteristic of the device. The only problem is that, in a real application one does not know how much power is being transmitted from different paths.

Due to the multiple heat transfer paths within a component, a single resistance cannot be used to accurately calculate the junction temperature. The thermal resistance from junction to ambient must be broken down further into a network of resistances to improve the accuracy of junction temperature prediction. A simplified resistor network is shown in Figure 2.

As board layouts become denser, there is a need to design optimized thermal solutions that use the least amount of space possible. Simply put, there is no margin to allow for over-designed heat sinks with tight component spacing. Accounting for the effect of board coupling is an important part of this optimization. The possibility for using an oversized heat sink exists only if the junction to case heat transfer path is considered.

To ensure a 105°C junction temperature at 55°C ambient a typical component (see Table 1) needs a heat sink resistance of 2.05°C/W (if we ignore board conduction). When board conduction is taken into account, the actual junction temperature could be as low as 74°C, assuming the board temperature is the same as the air temperature. This indicates a heat sink that is larger than necessary.

From this example, it is clear that all heat transfer paths from the component junction must be considered. Using just the ΘJC and ΘCA values can lead to a larger than optimal heat sink and may not accurately predict operating junction temperatures. Using the proposed correlation can also predict junction temperature when the board temperature is known from experimentation, as shown in Figure 3.

 

 

2 Comments

Posted in Analysis, cooling, heat transfer, Thermal Design, thermal management, Thermal resistance

Tagged , , , ,

Testing Thermal Interface Materials

Posted on June 19, 2012 by | 1 comment

Illustration: Parker Chomerics

Thermal interface materials, TIMs, provide the thermal pathway for transferring heat from components to heat sinks. At one time, most TIMs were simple, homogenous pads filled with thermally conductive fillers. But increasing power levels of processors and other components present a continuous need for improved thermal material performance. Today, a much wider range of TIMs is available, including phase change materials, compounds, and gap fillers.

When choosing a TIM, its essential to understand the testing methods to accurately determine the materials bulk thermal properties and in its performance.

The most common test is ASTM D5470: Linear Rod Method. This is the standard for measuring the thermal impedance of a TIM. Heat flow is carefully controlled through a test sample of a TIM. Typically, a heater is attached to an aluminum cylinder that has thermocouples arranged in series.

The thermocouples not only report temperature, but also the heat transfer through the known aluminum cylinder. Next, the interface material is compressed between the raised cylinder and an identical lower unit. Finally, a cold plate is attached to the bottom of the assembly to ensure the direction of heat transfer. The assembly can accommodate various material thicknesses and apply a range of pressure to the sample.

Another TIM test is laser flash diffusivity. Here, a small sample of interface material is subjected to a short pulse of laser energy. The temperature rise of the material is then recorded at a very high sample rate. Diffusivity is calculated using the equation shown below.

k = D/ρCp

Where:

k= thermal conductivity;

D = thermal diffusivity,

ρ = density of sample,

and Cp = specific heat.

The halftime of the sample is defined as the time between the start of the laser pulse to when the temperature of the back side of the sample has risen to half of its maximum value. The other variable in equation 1 is L, the thickness of the sample, which may be directly measured. Once diffusivity is known, it can be used in equation 2 to calculate thermal conductivity.

This laser flash method is very accurate as long as the density and specific heat are well known. However, it only measures thermal conductivity, as opposed to the ASTM standard which also measures thermal impedance. Thus, a key drawback to laser flash testing is that it doesn’t provide the contact resistance.

In comparisons of interface materials must be carried out by the user to provide meaningful results. Interface material testing procedures are different than heat sink testing methods. When testing several heat sinks it is possible to affix a thermocouple to the component’s case surface or to the heat sink itself and draw direct comparisons of performance. However, this approach will not work if the interface material is changed. To accurately compare interface materials, die-level temperature measurements must be taken, while the same heat sink is used in identical PCB and flow conditions.

1 Comment

Posted in Thermal, Thermal Interface Material, thermal management, Thermal Science

Tagged , , , , ,

Performance Differences between Fan Types Used for Electronics Cooling

Posted on June 6, 2012 by | 3 comments

Billions of fans are now in use for active cooling of PCBs and other hot electronic components. An article in Qpedia, the thermal e-magazine from Advanced Thermal Solutions, Inc., (ATS), explores the two most common types of fans used in electronics cooling: the radial (or centrifugal) fan and the axial fan.

The difference between the axial fan and radial fans can be divided into two parts, namely geometry and fluid dynamics.

An axial-flow fan has blades that force air to move in a parallel direction to the shaft around which the blades rotate. For a radial fan, the air flows in on a side of the fan housing, then turns 90 degrees and accelerates, due to centrifugal force as it exits the fan housing. These differences in air flow direction have design implications. For example, a radial fan can blow air across a PCB more efficiently, and use less space, than mounting an axial fan to blow air down onto a board.

The fluid flow rate through an electronics system, e.g., enclosure, is determined by the intercept between the fan and system curves that plot the air pressure drop over volumetric flow rate. A system’s air flow curve can be calculated using 1D fluid mechanics, or it may require the use of high performance CFD or experimental data. In general, for the same power and rotation speed, the radial fan can achieve a higher pressure head than an axial fan. However, an axial fan can achieve a higher maximum flow rate than a radial fan.

In theory, this same approach applies when using two fans in series or in parallel. When the fans are in series, the maximum flow rate should stay the same as for the single fan, but the maximum pressure head doubles. When using two fans in parallel, the maximum pressure head should remain the same as for the single fan, but the flow rate doubles. In real situations, though, the fans may interfere with each other, thus providing lower than expected results. Thus, actual experimentation is typically needed.

Download the Full ATS White Paper Performance Differences Between Fans and Blowers and Their Implementation

3 Comments

Posted in Active, Fan, Fans, Qpedia Thermal eMagazine, thermal management

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

An Instrument for Measuring Air Velocity, Pressure and Temperature in Electronics Enclosures

Posted on May 29, 2012 by | Leave a comment

For engineer-level thermal management studies, the iQ-200 instrument from Advanced Thermal Solutions, Inc, ATS, can simultaneously measure air velocity, air pressure and the temperature of components and surrounding air at multiple locations inside electronic systems. This enables users to obtain full and accurate profiles of components, heat sinks, PCBs and other electronics hardware to enable more effective thermal management.

Developed by Advanced Thermal Solutions, Inc., ATS, the iQ-200 system simultaneously captures data from up to 12 J-type thermocouples, 16 air/velocity sensors, and four pressure sensors.

The thermocouples provide surface area temperature measurements on heat spreaders, component packages, housing hardware, and elsewhere to track heat flow or detect hot spots. Temperature data is tracked from -40 to 750°C. The sensors (available separately) measure both air temperature and velocity at multiple points allowing a detailed analysis of airflow.

Candlestick Sensor from ATS

Thin, low profile ATS candlestick sensors can be easily positioned throughout a system under test and measure airflow from -10 to +6°C. Air velocity is measured from natural convection up to 6 m/s (1200 ft/min). The iQ-200 can be factory modified to measure airflow to 50 m/s (10,000 ft/min) and air temperature up to 85°C. Four differential transducers capture pressure drop data along circuit cards, assemblies and orifice plates. Standard pressure measurement capabilities range from 0- 1,034 Pa (0 – 0.15 psi).

The ATS iQ-200 system comes preloaded with user-friendly iSTAGE application software which effectively manages incoming data from the various sensor devices, and allows rich graphic presentation on monitors and captured on videos or documents. The iQ-200 connects via USB to any conventional PC for convenient data management, storage and sharing.

More information on the iQ-200 system from ATS can be found on Qats.com (http://www.qats.com/products/Temperature-and-Velocity-Measurement/Instruments/iQ-200/2632.aspx), or by calling 781-769-2800.

Leave a comment

Posted in Instrument, Sensor, Thermal Analysis, thermal engineering, thermal management, Thermal Research, Thermal Science, Uncategorized

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,