Thermal Management of

Electronics

Justin A. Weibel
Research Associate Professor, School of Mechanical Engineering
Associate Director, Cooling Technologies Research Center

Power and Energy, Onshore and Afloat

Course Number: CNIT 58100 (CRN: 18530) / IT 58100 (CRN:18534)
Nov 20 (3:30-4:45 PM)

Justin A Weibel: jaweibel@purdue.edu

1
https://engineering.purdue.edu/CTRC
Lecture Topics
Background & Motivation
 Thermal Management Landscape
 Computing Trends and Challenges
 Energy Implications

Thermal Management Basics

 Thermal Packaging Architecture
 Review of Heat Transport Resistances

Advanced Thermal Management Strategies

 Vapor Chamber Heat Spreaders
 Microchannel Heat Sinks
Further Textbook Reading
 Heat Transfer Fundamentals
 Incropera and DeWitt, Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer
 A.F. Mills, Basic Heat and Mass Transfer, 1995
 Electronics Cooling
 L.-T. Yeh, Thermal Management of Microelectronic Equipment, 2016
 Heat Pipes:
 A. Faghri, Heat Pipe Science and Technology, 1995
 G.P. Peterson, An Introduction to Heat Pipes, 1994
 D. Reay and P. Kew, Heat Pipes, 5th Edition, 2005
 Microchannels
 Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow in Minichannels and Microchannels, 2006
 Microchannel Heat Sinks for Electronics Cooling, 2013
Thermal Management Landscape
• Information and
communication technology
– High-performance
computing
– Data centers
– Telecommunications

• Electrified transportation
systems
– Hybrid/electric powertrains
– Aerospace
– Watercraft

• Renewable energy
– Smart grid
– Energy conversion processes
– Photovoltaics
– Batteries
Computing Trends
National Research Council Study by the
Committee on Sustaining Growth in Computing Performance

“Thermal-power challenges
and increasingly expensive
energy demands pose
threats to the historical rate
of increase in processor
performance.”
2011 NRC/CSTB Study:
“The Future of
Computing
Performance”
“…growth in the performance
of computer systems will
become limited by their
power and thermal
requirements within the next
decade”
Heat Flux Challenge
Other Challenges
 Multi-core processing: more
efficient and lower heat
fluxes…. but causes local hot
spots that must be
accommodated
 Thermal management in
extremely space constrained
devices
 System-level volumetric heat
generation density
 Thermo-mechanical and
Electro-thermal co-design
constraints
 Cost, consumer perception &
human factors, market trends,
etc.
 Challenge of Multiple Scales

Silicon Die (10-2) Heat Sink (10-1)

Package (10-2)

Facility (102)

Transistor (10-9 m)

System (100)
Natural
Resources
Defense Council
(NRDC)
Data Center
Efficiency
Assessment,
August 2014
© Suresh Garimella
IBM Z13 Server
https://apps.kaonadn.net/4882011/product.html#10/1066;C178
Thermal Management Architectures
Primary Heat Transfer Path

 I – Heat Sink
 V – Die
 II – Thermal Interface Material
 VI – Underfill
 III – Integrated Heat Spreader
 IV – Thermal Interface Material  VII – Package Substrate
Mahajan, “Thermal Interface Materials: A Brief Review of Design Characteristics and
Materials”, Electronics Cooling, Feb 2004
Simple Resistance Model

Primary Heat Transfer Path Ta [K]

(air
temperature)

Rtot [K/W]
q [W] (thermal
(heat resistance)
flow)

Tj [K]
Total temperature rise of the
chip described by the junction- q=
( T j − Ta ) (silicon
temperature)
to-ambient thermal resistance Rtot
Interfacial Resistances
Primary Heat Transfer Path
Interfaces pose large resistances due
to microscale surface asperities

1 ( ∆T )
R=
c =
hc q

Dry Contact Conductance

L.-T. Yeh, Thermal Management of Microelectronic Equipment, 2016

Thermal Interface Materials (TIM)
Primary Heat Transfer Path
Materials introduced into the air gap
to reduce the thermal resistance

RTIM = Rbulk + Rc1 + Rc 2

See reference below for calculation of

individual resistances

Mahajan, “Thermal Interface Materials: A Brief Review of Design Characteristics and

Materials”, Electronics Cooling, Feb 2004
Thermal Interface Materials (TIM)
TIM Type General Characteristics Advantages Disadvantages

Greases Typically silicone based •High bulk thermal •Susceptible to grease pump-out and phase
matrix loaded with conductivity separation
particles (typically AlN •Thin BLT with minimal attach pressure •Considered messy in a manufacturing
or ZnO) to enhance •Low viscosity enables matrix material to environment due to a tendency to migrate
thermal conductivity easily fill surface crevices
•TIM curing not required
•TIM delamination is not a concern
Phase Polyolefin, epoxy, low •Higher viscosity leads to increased stability •Lower thermal conductivity than
Change molecular weight and hence less susceptible to pumpout greases
Materials polyesters, acrylics •Application and handling is easier •Surface resistance can be greater than greases.
typically with BN or compared to greases Can be reduced by thermal pre-treatment
Al 2O3fillers •No cure required •Requires attach pressure to increase thermal
•Delamination is not a concern effectiveness hence can lead to increased
mechanical stresses
Gels Al, Al 2O3 , Ag particles •Conforms to surface irregularity before •Cure process needed
in silicone, olefin cure •Lower thermal conductivity than
matrices that require •No pump out or migration concerns grease
curing •Lower adhesion than adhesives; delamination
can be a concern
Adhesives Typically Ag particles in •Conform to surface irregularity before •Cure process needed
a cured epoxy matrix cure •Delamination post reliability testing is a concern
•No pump out •Since cured epoxies have high post cure
•No migration modulus, CTE mismatch induced stress is a
concern

Mahajan, “Thermal Interface Materials: A Brief Review of Design Characteristics and

Materials”, Electronics Cooling, Feb 2004
Principles of Conduction
Primary Heat Transfer Path
Fourier’s Law (1D):
Area, Ac dT
dx
dT
q = −kAc q
dx
x
L x2 x1
k – thermal conductivity [W/mK] is a 1D Conduction Resistance
material property
Ac – cross sectional area perpendicular to ∆T
q=
heat flow Rcond ,1D
dT/dx is the rate of change of temperature
with distance (K/m) L
Rcond ,1D =
kAc

L.-T. Yeh, Thermal Management of Microelectronic Equipment, 2016

Integrated Heat Spreader Resistance
Heat flow is not 1D when heat sink is larger Primary Heat Transfer Path
than the chip area; ‘constriction’ resistance
associated with heat spreading to different
area.

The spreading resistance can be determined from the  Ap − As   π kAp Ro + tanh(λ t ) 

Rc =   
following set of parameters:  k π Ap As   1 + π kAp Ro tanh(λ t ) 
• footprint or contact area of the heat source, As  
• footprint area of the heat sink base-plate, Ap 3
π 2 1
• thickness of the heat sink base-plate, t = λ +
Ap As
• thermal conductivity of the heat sink base-plate, k
• average heat sink thermal resistance, R0
Principles of Convection
Primary Heat Transfer Path
Newton’s Law of Cooling:
L
=q hA(Ts − T∞ ) 1
h = ∫ hdx
L0
h – heat transfer coefficient [W/m2K] is not a
material property, but depends on the flow
conditions and geometry

y y
T∞

T∞
u(y)
U∞

x
Ts
Principles of Convection
Primary Heat Transfer Path

L.-T. Yeh, Thermal Management of Microelectronic Equipment, 2016

Internal Flow (Constant Surface Temperature):

 p (Tout − Tin )
q = hA(∆Tlm ) = mc
Ts
(Ts − Tout ) − (Ts − Tin )
∆Tlm = T
ln[(Ts − Tout ) / (Ts − Tin )]
Tm(x)
 hPx 
Tm ( x) =
Ts + (Tm ,in − Ts ) exp  
 mc
  p
x
in out
Fin Heat Sink Resistance
Assumptions Primary Heat Transfer Path
• Uniform heat sink base temperature
• Fully developed flow between fins (conservative)
• Uniform flow
• Ambient air temperature constant around fins

=q ηo hAt (∆Tlm )

1 G
Rt =
ηo hAt
Tm
H h

Ts
Fin Heat Sink Resistance
Assumptions Primary Heat Transfer Path
• Uniform heat sink base temperature
• Fully developed flow between fins (conservative)
• Uniform flow
• Ambient air temperature constant around fins

k fluid Nu
h=
dc
G
Nu – nondimensional Nusselt number is a
constant for fully developed laminar flow
dc - Hydraulic diameter [m] is the Tm
characteristic dimension H h
4GH
dc =
2H + G
Ts
G – fin gap; H – fin height
Fin Heat Sink Resistance
Total Heat Sink Resistance : Primary Heat Transfer Path
(Ts − Ta )
RHS =
q
q= ηo hAt (∆Tlm =  p (Tout − Ta )
) mc

(Ts − Tout ) − (Ts − Ta )

∆Tlm =
ln[(Ts − Tout ) / (Ts − Ta )]
 ηo hAt 
Tout =Ts − (Ts − Ta ) exp  − 
 mc
  p 

(Ts − Ta ) 1
=
RHS =
q   ηo hAt 
Determines the required  p 1 − exp  −
mc  
 mc
flow rate of air    p  
Simple Resistance Model

Primary Heat Transfer Path Ta [K]

(air
temperature)

q [W] Rtot [K/W]

(heat (thermal
flow) resistance)

Tj [K]
Total temperature rise of the
chip described by the junction- q=
( T j − Ta ) (silicon
temperature)
to-ambient thermal resistance Rtot
Advanced Thermal Management
Strategies

Justin A Weibel: jaweibel@purdue.edu

25
https://engineering.purdue.edu/CTRC
Next-Gen Thermal Management
Naval vessels and aircraft are Northrop
equipped with increasingly Grumman
AN/APG-81
advanced electronic systems that AESA Radar

require high-density cooling

strategies to enable reductions in
size, weight, and power without Active electronically scanned arrays (AESA) house hundreds of
compromising performance. high-power amplifiers (HPA); next-gen GaN HPA devices require
transformative high-heat-flux embedded cooling strategies.

DARPA ‘Thermal Ground Planes’ DARPA ‘ICECool Fundamentals’

Radio Frequency TGP Hierarchical Manifold Microchannel Array

(Raytheon, Purdue, GTRI, Thermacore) (Purdue, Raytheon, IBM)
Vapor Chamber and Heat
Pipe Spreaders

Justin A Weibel: jaweibel@purdue.edu

27
https://engineering.purdue.edu/CTRC
Principles of Heat Pipe Operation

Passive Operation
Low ΔT
Operate against gravity
http://www.aavid.com/product-group/heatpipe/operate Reliable
Heat Transfer Performance

Evaporator - Qin Condenser – heff &Tamb

 Effective Conductivity
 100,000 W/mK possible
 Not an intrinsic property; does not
account for operation limits;
meant for higher level system
models after experimental
validation
Heat Pipe Transport Limits

Reay and Kew, Heat Pipes (2006)

 Heat Pipe Transport Limits
Transport
What it is
Limit
Sum of gravitational, liquid and
vapor flow pressure drops exceed
Capillary
the capillary pumping head of the
heat pipe wick structure
Vapor flow reaches sonic velocity
(choking) when exiting heat pipe
Sonic evaporator resulting in a constant
heat pipe transport power and
large temperature gradients
High velocity vapor flow prevents
Entrainment
condensate from returning to
/Flooding
evaporator (liquid tear-off)
Film boiling in heat pipe
Boiling
evaporator initiates
Viscous forces prevent vapor flow
in the heat pipe, vapor pressure
Viscous
drop can’t exceed absolute vapor
pressure
Adapted from S. D. Garner, Heat Pipes for Electronics Cooling Applications (1996)
Why it happens
Heat pipe input power
exceeds the design heat
transport capacity of the heat
pipe
Power/temperature
combination, too much power
at low operating temperature
Heat pipe operating above
designed power input or at too
low an operating temperature
High radial heat flux causes
film boiling resulting in heat
pipe dryout and large thermal
resistances
Heat pipe operating below
recommended operating
temperature, operating near
freezing point
Possible Solution
Modify heat pipe wick
structure design or reduce
power input
Typically only a problem at
start-up. The heat pipe
carries a set power and the
large ∆T self-corrects as
the heat pipe warms up.
Increase vapor core area.
Increase vapor space
diameter or operating
temperature
Use a wick with a higher
heat flux capacity or spread
out the heat load
Increase heat pipe
operating temperature or
find alternative working
fluid
Capillary Limit

Pc ≥ ∆Pl + ∆Pv + ∆Pg

 At steady operation, the following pressures balance

 Capillary pumping pressure, Pc
 Liquid pressure drop, ΔPl
 Vapor pressure drop, ΔPv
 Gravitational pressure drop, ΔPg

 There is a maximum capillary pressure that can be developed by

a given liquid-wick combination. The required PC must never
exceed PC,max that can be provided by the wick. Else, dryout is
caused in the evaporator.
Fluid Figures of Merit
 Neglecting gravitational and vapor pressure drop

Pc ≥ ∆Pl + ∆Pv + ∆Pg

 The maximum heat transport becomes

  ρσ h fg   KA   2 
Q max =    
 µ   L eff   reff 
 Fluid property dependent Figure of Merit
Mills (1995)

ρσ h fg
M=
µ
Microchannel Heat Sinks

Justin A Weibel: jaweibel@purdue.edu

34
https://engineering.purdue.edu/CTRC
Why Microchannels?

• Amongst the most effective of the high-heat-flux heat transfer technologies

• Flow boiling operation has promise for: (1) lower pumping power, (2) improved
fluid temperature uniformity, and (3) higher heat transfer coefficients
(compared to single-phase liquid cooling)
• Why now? new manufacturing techniques and emerging application needs

Microchannel Test Chip

High-Speed Visualization of Flow Boiling in a Microchannel
A Simple Calculation

As revealed by simple scaling, large convection coefficients are

associated with small channel dimensions (h ∝ 1/d).

Example:
Consider a microchannel of width 60 µm and depth 300 µm (i.e.,
Dh = 100 µm). With a uniform wall temperature assumption, in
fully developed laminar flow, the NuDh is 4.8. Even for a
dielectric liquid with k = 0.06 W/mK,

h = (NuDh kf) / Dh = 2880 W/m2K

For water (k ≈ 0.6 W/mK) the value of h is 10 times higher

Single-Phase Heat Transfer
Reference Correlations Conditions Valid range

Geometry Flow regime

Kays and Crawford (
Nu fd =8.235 1 − 1.883 / α + 3.767 / α − 5.814 / α + 5.361/ α − 2 / α
2 3 4 5
) (1) Rectangular Fully developed flow
(Both hydrodynamically and Re < 2200
thermally)
Sieder-Tate correlation Nu = 1.86 Re Pr D / L 1/ 3  µ f 
0.14
Incropera and DeWitt Circular Simultaneously developing
( )   (2)
flow Re < 2200
 µw 
Stephan and Preußer 0.0677 ( Re Pr D / L ) Circular Simultaneously developing 0.7 < Pr < 7
1.33
Stephan correlation (3)
=Nu 3.657 + flow or
1 + 0.1Pr ( Re D / L )
0.3
(Constant wall temperature) Re Pr D/L < 33
for Pr > 7
Stephan and Preußer 0.086 ( Re Pr D / L ) Circular Simultaneously developing 0.7 < Pr < 7
1.33
Stephan correlation=
Nu 4.364 + (4) flow or
1 + 0.1Pr ( Re D / L )
0.83
(Constant wall heat flux) Re Pr D/L < 33
for Pr > 7
Incropera and DeWitt 0.19 ( Re Pr D / L ) Circular Hydrodynamically
0.8
Hausen correlation =
Nu 3.66 + (5) developed, but thermally Re < 2200
1 + 0.117 ( Re Pr D / L )
0.467
developing laminar flow
(Constant wall temperature)
Shah and London   D
1/ 3
 D Circular Hydrodynamically
 1.953  Re Pr   Re Pr  ≥ 33.3 (6) developed, but thermally −
  L  L
Nu =  developing laminar flow
4.364 + 0.0722 Re Pr D  D (Constant wall heat flux)
  Re Pr  < 33.3
L  L
Kacac et al. Hausen correlation Nu = 0.116 Re 2 / 3 − 125 Pr1/ 3 1 + D / L 2 / 3   µ f  Circular
0.14

( )  ( )  µ  (7)
Transitional flow 2200 < Re <
 w 10000
Incropera and DeWitt Dittus-Boelter correlation Nu = 0.023 Re0.8 Pr1/ 3 (8) Circular Fully developed turbulent
flow Re > 10000
Incropera and DeWitt Petukhov correlation
Nu =
( f / 8) Re Pr (9) Circular Fully developed turbulent
K + 12.7 ( f / 8 ) ( Pr 2 / 3 − 1)
1/ 2 flow Re > 10000

900 0.63
K = 1.07 + −
Re 1 + 10 Pr
Gnielinski Gnielinski correlation
Nu =
( f 8)( Re D -1000 ) Pr (10) Circular Both the transitional and 3000 < Re < 5
× 10
6
fully developed turbulent
1 + 12.7 ( f 8 ) (Pr − 1)
12 23
flows
Single-Phase Conclusions
• Conventional theory offers reliable predictions for the flow
characteristics in microchannels
• Heat transfer measurements are conducted with an
emphasis on correctly matching the entrance and thermal
conditions when comparing to conventional correlations
developed for large-sized channels
• Numerical predictions obtained based on a classical,
continuum approach with carefully matched entrance and
boundary conditions are in good agreement with the data
Two Phase Flow in Microchannels

 Flow boiling is attractive because it

 can dissipate higher heat fluxes
 requires lower coolant mass
 has more uniform wall temperature

 Flow boiling mechanisms in microchannels are

not fully understood
 Most available flow maps based on macroscale
channel flow are not applicable
 Results obtained for single microchannel cannot
be simply extrapolated for multiple microchannels
 Lack of generally accepted models/correlations
Liu et al., IJHMT 48, 2005; JHT 127, 2005
Two Phase Flow in Microchannels
 In-situ measurement of local wall
temperature & flux, high-speed Flow Boiling Regimes in Microchannels
visualizations Bubbly
 Flow regime determination and regime-
based modeling for dielectric fluids
 Instability, hysteresis, surface roughness,
geometry, operating condition effects
Alternating Churn/Annular
Microchannel Test Chip

Inverted Annular

Chen, Garimella, IEEE CPT 2007; IJMF 2006

Channel width: 100-5850 μm Bertsch, Groll, Garimella, IJHMT 2008; NMTE 2008
Channel depth: 100-400 μm
Harirchian, Garimella, IJHMT 2008, 2010; IJMF 2008, 2009; JEP 2010
Hydraulic diameter: 100-750 μm
Mass flux: 225-1450 kg/m2s Patel, Harirchian, Garimella, IPACK 2011
Flow Regime Prediction and Models
Comprehensive Flow Regime Map

Confined Slug
 G – x and jf – jg flow regime maps 10
10 -2
1 Churn/Confined Annular
depend on channel dimensions Bubbly
Churn/Wispy-Annular
 Comprehensive four-region flow Churn/Annular

regime map represents data for a

wide range of channel

Bl.Re
dimensions, mass fluxes, and heat 100
-3

fluxes
 Validation of flow-regime based
theoretical heat transfer and
pressure drop models against =Bl 0.017 ( Bo 0.4 × Re-0.3 )
empirical data -4
10-1
10 Bo 0.5 × Re =
160
1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10
0.5
(Bo) .Re

“Microchannels”: Confined Flow Regimes “Macrochannels”: Unconfined Flow Regimes

Harirchian, Garimella, IJHMT 2010, IJMF 2012
Current Challenges/Needs
 Embedded sensors for system control
 Measurement techniques for characterization of thin
liquid films that govern heat transport in small channels
 Development of numerical methods to allow tractable
direct simulation of flow boiling in small channels
 Electro-thermal co-design for development of high-
performance, intrachip heat sink technologies
 Characterization of the impact of static/dynamic
instabilities and flow maldistribution on performance