0
Research Papers: Two-Phase Flow and Heat Transfer

Thermal Modeling and Experimental Validation for High Thermal Conductivity Heat Pipe Thermal Ground Planes

[+] Author and Article Information
Mohammed T. Ababneh

Department of Mechanical
and Materials Engineering,
Microscale Heat Transfer Laboratory,
University of Cincinnati,
Cincinnati, OH 45221-0018
e-mail: ababnemt@mail.uc.edu;
mohammed.ababneh@1-act.com

Shakti Chauhan

GE Global Research Center,
Niskayuna, NY 12309
e-mail: chauhan@ge.com

Pramod Chamarthy

CoolChip Technologies,
Boston, MA 02111
e-mail: pramodchamarthy@gmail.com

Frank M. Gerner

University of Cincinnati,
Cincinnati, OH 45221-0018
e-mail: Frank.Gerner@uc.edu

1Corresponding author.

2Present address: R&D Engineer, Defense/Aerospace Division, Advanced Cooling Technologies, Inc., Lancaster, PA 17601.

Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF HEAT TRANSFER. Manuscript received January 1, 2014; final manuscript received June 18, 2014; published online August 18, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Ali Khounsary.

J. Heat Transfer 136(11), 112901 (Aug 18, 2014) (8 pages) Paper No: HT-14-1004; doi: 10.1115/1.4028086 History: Received January 01, 2014; Revised June 18, 2014

Thermal ground planes (TGPs) are flat, thin (external thickness of 2 mm) heat pipes which utilize two-phase cooling. The goal is to utilize TGPs as thermal spreaders in a variety of microelectronic cooling applications. In addition to TGPs and flat heat pipes, some investigators refer to similar devices as vapor chambers. TGPs are novel high-performance, integrated systems able to operate at a high power density with a reduced weight and temperature gradient. In addition to being able to dissipate large amounts of heat, they have very high effective axial thermal conductivities and (because of nanoporous wicks) can operate in high adverse gravitational fields. A three-dimensional (3D) finite element model is used to predict the thermal performance of the TGP. The 3D thermal model predicts the temperature field in the TGP, the effective axial thermal conductivity, and the evaporation and the condensation rates. A key feature of this model is that it relies on empirical interfacial heat transfer coefficient data to very accurately model the interfacial energy balance at the vapor–liquid saturated wick interface. Wick samples for a TGP are tested in an experimental setup to measure the interfacial heat transfer coefficient. Then the experimental heat transfer coefficient data are used for the interfacial energy balance. Another key feature of this model is that it demonstrates that for the Jakob numbers of interest, the thermal and flow fields can be decoupled except at the vapor–liquid saturated wick interface. This model can be used to predict the performance of a TGP for different geometries and implementation structures. This paper will describe the model and how it incorporates empirical interfacial heat transfer coefficient data. It will then show theoretical predictions for the thermal performance of TGP's, and compare with experimental results.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Engineered nanostructures for high thermal conductivity prototype TGP substrates [9]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Thermal resistance pathway

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Boundary conditions for the MTE without evaporation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Heat transfer coefficient at the wick–pool interface, hcond, as a function of heat input

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Boundary conditions and the temperature distribution for the MTE with evaporation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

hevap as a function of heat input

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

hevap as a function of ΔT

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Boundary conditions for the TGP

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Temperature distribution for LTGP = 3 cm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Temperature distribution for LTGP = 9 cm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Temperature distribution for LTGP = 15 cm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Effective thermal conductivity as a function of TGP's length

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Comparison of experimental and ANSYS model temperature distributions for the TGP with Tcondenser = 60  °C

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Comparison of experimental and ANSYS model temperature distributions for the TGP with Tcondenser = 75  °C

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Comparison of experimental and ANSYS model temperature distributions for the TGP with Tcondenser = 90  °C

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Comparison of experimental and ANSYS model temperature distributions for the TGP with Tcondenser = 60  °C

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Comparison of experimental and ANSYS model temperature distributions for the TGP with Tcondenser = 75  °C

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Comparison of experimental and ANSYS model temperature distributions for the TGP with Tcondenser = 90  °C

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In