IAC-06-C2.7.6 MICRO HEAT SPREADERS BASED ON MICROCHANNELS FOR CONCENTRATED HEAT FLUXES ON SPACECRAFT SUBSYSTEMS.

Mr. Rafael Rebolo Gmez SENER Ingeniera y Sistemas, S.A.. Tres Cantos. Spain. e-mail: rafael.rebolo@sener.es Mrs. Paula Alvarez Legazpi SENER Ingeniera y Sistemas, S.A.. Tres Cantos. Spain. e-mail: paula.alvarez@sener.es Dr. Johan Steelant European Space Agency/ESTEC. Noordwijk. The Netherlands. e-mail: Johan.Steelant@esa.int Dr. Ezequiel Gonzlez Martnez Universidad Politcnica de Madrid. Madrid. Spain. e-mail: egm@aero.upm.es Dr. Benigno Lzaro Gmez Universidad Politcnica de Madrid. Madrid. Spain. e-mail: benigno.lazaro@upm.es

ABSTRACT A micro heat spreader (MHS) is a micro-fluidic device designed for thermal management of electronic components by means of controlled liquid convection in a closed loop. In contrast to classical fluid loops, the design and the optimization of a micro heat spreader is complex. It requires an adaptation and a good understanding of the fluid dynamic behaviour at this subscale-level along with the fabrication process of micro electro-mechanical systems. Based on analytical predictions, this new approach would increase the heat dissipation with an order of magnitude compared to passive cooling strategies. First, an overview will be given of what has been studied and developed so far on heat exchangers and micro-heat spreaders for dense heat fluxes. Their applicability towards a spacecraft environment will be assessed. Secondly, under design/optimisation aspects, where massive numerical tools are not applicable, engineering approximations based in simplified methods and engineering correlations need to be developed. Classical engineering correlations do not always seem to be applicable for micro-fluidic devices, and new ones from computational or experimental fluid dynamics (CFD and EFD respectively) have been obtained. Simple models featuring the physical behaviour of the MHS allow for sensitivity analysis of geometrical and operational parameters, driving to an optimum design. Finally, a MHS prototype based on microchannels, designed along the above mentioned considerations as a test demonstrator and using single phase fluid, will be discussed. Previously a less exigent design aimed to visualisation, rig calibration and priming process studies have been tested.

INTRODUCTION

In electronic cooling, the primary critical metrics that it must be met is the device junction temperature, close related to the heat dissipation and method used for allowing it. As temperature in electronics is closely associated with operating efficiency and

failure rates, management of thermal loads is necessary to ensure proper and reliable device performance. Elevated temperatures can adversely affect the operation, reliability, power handling capability, and achievable packaging density of the electronic devices. Since the electronics are smaller and faster, they produce more heat. This energy will be

efficiently removed in order to maintain the electronics temperature below a certain value. While the electronics improve their capabilities, the heat dissipation systems must also improve accordingly. There are two aims on this technical note. The first is to review the state-of-the-art of the existing MHS, assessing their applicability within a spacecraft environment. The second aim is to present those thermal-fluids aspects related to the problem (originated mainly by the use of micro scale flow paths), thus as the formulation and methods applicable in their resolution. Finally a short description of the MHS developed and their tested performance is presented.

Secondary Thermal Control System (STCS): Transfers the heat produced by a discrete group of hot spots to the radiators or intermediate heat sinks. The heat produced by these elements is very high and concentrated in comparison with their volume. Therefore the heat shall be extracted directly from their surfaces by means of local spreaders, transferred to the radiators or intermediate heat sinks from the MTCS, and dissipated by them; in order to maintain the component temperature in the appropriate range.

2.2

Secondary Thermal description

Control

System

SPACE APPLICATION

Because the wide spectrum of possible applications it is difficult to define a particular optimum solution for the heat dissipation subsystem. Therefore a general description of the problem and the possible architecture will be presented only as a guide, understanding that many other solutions are possible. Also, the system will incorporate several subsystems not considered in this study, which is focused on the thermohydraulic design of the hot component. This component, in the following the MHS, will be in direct contact with the heat source (again, because generality, referred as the hot spot: CPU, sensor, power electronic, etc.)

Its mission is to ensure the dissipation of the concentrated high heat flux from the hot spots to an intermediate system from which heat is dissipated by the MTCS to the deep space, while maintaining the component temperature below a given value. As consequence of this intermediate heat sink with a relative high temperature, one of the key parameters will be the thermal resistance, defined as the ratio of the temperature difference between junction and fluid intake bulk temperature to the dissipated heat. From literature survey, there are not specific designs able to work within the requirements of high fluxes and relative long distances between hot and cold points. The selected STCS, according to next paragraph is based on a working fluid pumped in a closed loop from the spreaders to the sink, and to the spreader again closing the circuit. Each MHS is placed in contact with the corresponding hot spot, in such way that heat is transferred from the hot spot to each MHS by conduction. The fluid inside the MHS takes the heat by forced convection, increasing its enthalpy (with or without changing its phase, depending on the design). The transmitter, thanks to a hydraulic system (pump(s), valves, pipes), drives the liquid from the spreader to the sink, where the heat is transferred to it by forced convection. The operating or no-operating mode of each MHS can be commanded by a thermal sensor, which monitors the hot spot temperature. According to the thermal sensors signals, the transmitter defines which MHS shall be operative or no operative in each moment. 2

2.1

Thermal Control System description

The heat generated by the components in a satellite shall be effectively dissipated to the deep space, in order to maintain an acceptable temperature for these components. The Thermal Control System (TCS) consists of the following sub-systems: Main Thermal Control System (MTCS): Transfers the heat produced by macro scale components, equipments and assemblies to the radiators. The heat flux produced by these elements is low in comparison with their volume; therefore the heat can be extracted globally from them (cold plates, etc), transferred to the radiators (heat pipes, etc), and dissipated by them.

Both philosophy and requirements of the MHS are dependent of the spacecraft/vehicle where it is going to be installed thus the mission to be fulfilled. Aiming to maintain generality in the MHS design, but limiting the possible scope of applications, a general scenario representative for a wide spectrum of applications is defined as: The STCS will use a heat sink, belonging to the MTCS, as cold point for rejecting heat. Therefore heat will not be transferred directly to radiators, but to an intermediate cold plate, in a distance range around half to one metre, being this cold plate part of the MTCS and with a higher temperature than the external radiators. The electronic box to be refrigerated will contain one or more components of high thermal flux (hot spots).

Imposed by the spacecraft and the mission

Operating temperature 40 to 80 C Non-operating temperature (-30 to 90 C) Minimum power consumption Operating at zero g No leakage

Table Ic: MHS requirements

MHS REVIEW

There exists an elevated number of devices and methods for cooling, some of them proven and other at different states of development. Some of them are: doublets, phase change material, immersion cooling, vapour chambers, heat pipes, jet impingement, liquid cooling loops, etc. There exits several reviews were more detailed description can be found [1]. For the purpose of this paper, only some of the above systems are candidates because the high heat fluxes involved. In particular will be considered the heat pipes (HP) and its derivatives (miniature HPs, loop HPs, capillarity pumped HPs, etc.), the jet impingement and the liquid cooling loops based on microchannels. And investigation of the technical literature can provide some data about the performance of these devices, mainly at laboratory level. It is difficult to compare one to other because the different testing condition, sizes, geometries, etc. Therefore it has been extracted from the literature some merit figures such as heat fluxes, hot spot area pressure drop, thermal resistance, etc [2 to 19]. These values no always are clearly defined in the papers; nevertheless any claims of an excellent merit figure have been taken into account, considering the number as a record, even if it could be discussible. This set of scarce data has been plotted in the two following plots (figures 1 and 2), and some application zones have been traced (these regions can change as the number of represented devices increase, and must be only taken as a guideline). On the plots has been indicated a rectangular zone corresponding to the interest area for space application, and inside it there is a hollow circle showing the target of this study.

2.3

Requirements

The requirements imposed in this study to the system will be aimed to performance and operation; neglecting such important aspects as life, maintainability, mechanical/electrical environments, etc. This reduced set of requirements imposed to the current design is summarized in tables Ia to Ic.

Imposed by the cooled component (hot spot)

Thermal Heat flux up to 150 W/cm . Junction temperature equal or lower than 100 C. Maximum temperature difference on interface 40 C
2

Geometric Hot spot size 20 x 15 mm

2

Table Ia: MHS requirements

Imposed by the spacecraft thermal control

Thermal Sink temperature 60 C (equal to the cooling fluid inlet temperature) Geometric Minimum mass and volume (target of < 0.06 kg and 40 x 3 40 x 10 mm excluding inlet/outlet)

Table Ib: MHS requirements

1000 Hot Spot Heat flux (W/cm 2) mchannel mHP mLHP 100 mjet LHP Target

Precision in the temperature control of electronics/payload by micropump flow control Ability to function in adverse and zero gravity Of course there also are some drawbacks as to be an active system with the possible increase on weight because additional equipment (pumps, piping, accumulators, etc.). A final trade-off will depend of particular application and architecture. In this paper a microchannel is considered as a duct (whatever cross section) with hydraulic diameters between 10 microns and 0.5 mm.

10

1 0 5 10 Hot spot area (cm 2) 15 20

Fig. 1: Different cooling concepts for small hot spots refrigeration and dense heat fluxes. The data have been extracted from technical literature and can be considered as the state of the art. Most of them do not fulfil any requirements, being experimental devices. The lines try to identify application areas.

4
1000 Host spot heat flux (W/cm 2) LHP mLHP mHP HP

MHS DESIGN

100

10

1 0.01

0.1

Length (m)

10

Fig. 2: Different cooling concepts for small hot spots refrigeration and dense heat fluxes. Comparison of MHS based on microchannels with HPs. Length is a measurement of the distance between hot source and cold sink. For active systems, functionally there is not limitation for this length (nevertheless constrain because mass, volume, etc. should be considered in a practical application).

Today, the design of heat exchangers based on microchannels is not as straightforward as in meso/macro scale. Main difficulties arise because the classical engineering approach based on correlations does not apply. During some years many of the discrepancies between macro and micro scale results were attributed to particular fluid behaviours, which put in doubt the applicability of the classical Navier-Stokes equations, and the traditional non-slip and non-temperature jump boundary conditions. Also, phenomena neglected in macro flow were proposed as explanation for the discrepancies (non newtonian behaviour, electric double layer, etc.) After the analysis of the literature and some CFD testing the conclusion, for the aforementioned range of duct sizes (dh > 50 microns), is that no strange behaviours are found in the flow (except perhaps the early transition to turbulent). The origin of discrepancies between usual predictions and testing (after neglecting ill defined tests) is that in microscale must be considered the following effects: Fluid and important thermal entry length are

From the plots, in the interest area both microchannels cooling device and loop heat pipes (some experts considers these loop HP values as questionable ones) could cover the thermal performance. In this study has been selected as MHS based on microchannel pumped liquid cooling system with a single-phase working fluid. Some of the more evident advantages are [2]: Increased effectiveness by integration of cooling system with payload Increased freedom in locating electronic or science payload Removal of large heat fluxes over large distances

Effect of temperature in the fluid must be considered (increment of 40 C between inlet and outlet is normal, being the pipe length of the order of a centimetre). Neither heat flux nor temperature is constant along the pipe wall and around the perimeter.

4.1

Heat transfer and pressure drops

nd

The approach followed in this work has been to obtain correlations by using CFD and published results, which could be applicable to simple engineering models. Per instance, for the Nusselt number, Nu, was extracted from CFD the following correlations, based on average channel bottom wall temperature, average channel lateral walls heat flux and mean fluid bulk temperature and properties:

0.8 L Re n 0.0233 Dh = = 1 + 0.426 L 1 + 2.4 Re n Dh

( )

( )

and
= 96. * (1 - 1.3553
1 1 1 1 1 + 1.9467 - 1.7012 + 0.9564 - 0.2537 ) H H H H H
2 3 4 5

Nu = (Nu + Nu op ) fin
h dh k fluid

Where the Nusselt number is defined as

Nu =

The pressure drop at inlet/outlet manifolds must be computed by CFD and the data can be correlated in a simple way in order to be applied in the models. These pressure drops were written as:
Pin / out = K 1 2 vin / out K1in / out + 2in / out 2 Re in / out

being h the convection coefficient, dh the hydraulic diameter and k the thermal conductivity; the sub index to ducts with dh/L 0 and the op one to the operation point (takes into account entry length). The Nusselt number for thermally developed and laminar flow is a function of the channel aspect ratio, H, equal to the ratio between channel depth and width. Nu = 1.776 + 0.586*H 0.0347*H2 + 0.0007*H3 While the operation is a function of Reynolds and Prandtl number and channel relative length.
d 0.2 Re Pr h L Nu op = 0.467 d 1 + 0.1 Re Pr h L
0.8

with K1 and K2 from numerical analysis (or handbook if the geometrical configuration is not too much complex). Total pressure

PMHS = Pin + Pch

drop + Pout .

would

be

Neglecting entry effect the expressions can be simplified and written in non dimensional way as:
Pc a 3 Q L c p T W =
2 (1 + H f )(1 + H )

H3

for pressure and

c a 3 Q 2 L 2 (c p ) T W =
2 (1 + H f )(1 + H )

H3

fin is the fin efficiency, also maintains the

classical expression with slightly modifications from CFD results (Hf refers to the ratio between fin and channel width).
0.5 k f Nu 1 + H tgh 0.5 H kw f tgh( N ) 1.1364 = 1.1364 0.5 N k f Nu 1 + H H 0. 5 kw f

fin

for pumping power. These expressions show the influence of the different parameters involved in design: fluid properties, operating point and geometry. In previous expressions, L and W are the footprint size, a the channel width and Q the evacuated heat. , and cp are density, dynamic viscosity and specific heat for the fluid.

In a similar way, for the pressure drop in the channels has been taken the following correlations:
Pc =

4.2

MHS thermal resistance

1 2 L with v c f c f = nd = nd 2 Dh Re Dh vDh

The thermal resistance definition is the classical one based on junction temperature, fluid inlet temperature and evacuated heat. This resistance can be split in three terms:

where

 MHS = MHS

T j T inlet

with some mathematical manipulation and a simple model where only transversal conduction is considered can be rewritten as: A. cond

Geometry

Q Q = cond + conv + heat

T j Tw

Tw T exit T exit T inlet + Q Q

Parameter

Pc

cond

conv

heat

Working Fluid

H Hf a e L W (c p ) kf kw Q T Pc

e 1 , that is a function of the k w LW

minimum thickness between MHS bottom and channel lower wall and the material. Minimum thickness (compatible with structural integrity and deformations) and maximum thermal conductivity are desirable. B. a conv
1 H (1 + H f ) 1 a 1 H (1 + H f ) 1 2 LW Nu k f (1 + H ) LW Nu k f (1 + H )2

Table II: Qualitative effect of the different geometrical, working fluid and operation parameters in the MHS performance. means a parameter increase. a decrease and a double arrow an increase/decrease with an exponent higher than 1.

or written in nondimensional way:

conv L W k f
a

1 H (1 + H f ) 1 Nu (1 + H )2

With the above equations is very easy to plot the effect of the different parameters or write some qualitative table as Table II. With the above analysis and the supposition that both the heat to be dissipated and the maximum increase in cooling fluid temperature are given, can be stated that: It is advantageous to select channel aspect ratios as high as possible, though the benefices decrease at higher H. As a guide the aspect ratio would be greater than 3 or 4. Low separation between channels improves the design (at least up to a minimum in terms of conv). As a guide, the lower Hf needs to be selected. Structural or manufacturing considerations dictate this value (about 50 to 75 m is considered a practicable value). Distance between MHSs interface and bottom side of the channel, e, is dictated by structural considerations. Minimum value is considered around 1 mm. L and W are dependent of the hot spots size, and the target (requirements) imposes them. Pressure can be minimized if the microchannel is split in branches (branch length: L/n). Microchannel width has a great impact on pressure loss and pumping power. When these parameters are fixed, there is a value that minimized the total thermal resistance. This value should be analyzed in detail later, when restrictions to the MHS (such as maximum junction

where the entry length effect have been neglected in order to simplify the Nussetl expression, being only function of the channel aspect ratio. C. heat

T fluid 1 Q c p

In the previous expressions the thermal resistance can be changed with a variation in the mass flow, but that implies a variation in pressure drop and pumping power. Assuming an allowable P for the pressure drop (inlet/outlet pressure drop neglected) this can be rewritten as:

heat a 3 P
c p L W

2 (1 + H ) (1 + H f )

H3

or

heat (a 3 )

1/ 2 1/ 2

L (c )2 W p

(1 + H )2 (1 + H f = H3 8

1/ 2

if the constraint is the pumping power.

Operation point

temperature and fluid entry temperature) are imposed. For the fluid, low viscosity, high thermal capacity and high thermal conductivity are advantageous for the MHS. For the MHS material, high thermal conductivity is advantageous (in consideration with working fluid compatibility). The following plot shows the typical behaviour of thermal resistance for fixed pressure loss and geometry (fixed H and Hf) as a function of the channel width, a. Only the convective and heat resistances have been presented because conduction one is a constant value proportional to MHS bottom thickness.

2. Low freezing point and burst point (in this case < -30 C) 3. High atmospheric boiling point or low vapour pressure at the operating temperature. 4. Good mechanical and thermal stability (specially under severe environments) 5. High flash temperature point and auto-ignition

6. Non-corrosive to materials of construction 7. No or minimal regulatory constraints (environmentally friendly, non-toxic, and possibly biodegradable) 8. Economical 9. Electrical conductivity (it is important if the fluid comes in direct contact with the electronics, or if it leaks out of a cooling loop or is spilled during maintenance). From the above requirements some are more critical than others for the considered application in this study. In particular requirements 1, 2, 3, 4 y 6 are important, while the others can be relaxed. Though the working range is above 60 C (temperature from the returning fluid from sink), the fluid needs to withstand without freezing up to 30 C. This precludes the use of pure water (otherwise and excellent election) and some other fluids must be considered. Table III shows typical properties for the liquids that have been selected for comparison, including water as reference. Properties are given at the operating temperature (around 60 C) and they correspond to 1 Bar (else indicated); units are in IS.
H2O+ NH3 (1) -46 100 (5) 900 4300 0.59
-4

0.20 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 0 50 100 150 200 a (microns) 250 300 350 400 conv heat conv+heat

Fig. 3: Example of the existence of an optimum for thermal resistance (conduction thermal resistance not plotted because dependence of channel geometry is almost negligible). than

conv

is greater

heat

in the interest area (to the right of the

minimum). Therefore, improvement in the first will be more important in the final result (this reason justified the greater weight when selecting a fluid of the thermal conductivity, kfluid, that the thermal capacity, cp).

4.3

Working fluid
Water Ammonia -77 100 (4) 545 5230 0.39 0.94 10 Tfreezing (Tpouring), 0 C Tboiling 100 C Density 983 3 kg/m Cp 4185 J/kg-K Ther. Cond. 0.65 W/m-K Viscosity 4.7 10-4 Kg/m-s

From the previous analysis can be deducted some requirements for the selection of the working fluid, such as low viscosity and high thermal capacity and conductivity. In general, the requirements may vary depending on the type of application; following there is a list of some general requirements for single phase flow [20]: 1. Good thermo-physical properties (high thermal conductivity and specific heat and low viscosity as already stated).

H2O+EG (2) -40 107.8 1057 3340 0.38

H2O+PG (3) -40 106.1 1018 3600 0.35

Acetone -93.2 100 ( ) 780 2130 0.16

5

GALDEN HT130 < -40 130 1650 1212.2 0.1

XCELTM 500 < -40

766 2330 0.13

-4

5.5 10

-4

1.52 10

-3

1.98 10

-3

4.15 10

-4

8.90 10

2.8 10-3

( ) 22 % ;( ) 54 % ; ( ) 54 % ; ( ) Pressure 100 Bar ; ( ) Pressure 4 to 5 Bar

1 2 3 4 5

Table III: Working fluid typical properties at 60 C.

Using a simple model as described above, for equal channel geometry, can be estimated the effect of the fluid in the pressure loss, pumping power and thermal resistance (Table IV). Inspection of the table shows that water and ammonia are the best fluids under the point of view of performance. Nevertheless the first one cannot be used because the operating temperature range imposed by the requirements. The second one requires, in order avoiding boiling (this design is for single phase flow MHS) to be pressurized (around 100 Bar). This pressurization translates into potential leakage and more robust structural design (and therefore a thicker MHS increasing conduction thermal resistance) and at the end additional weight.

(compatible with aluminium) and fluids based glycol (per instance TYFOCOR L50 compatible with both aluminium and copper). While in macroscale heat exchanger, the product c p usually is one of the main criteria for fluid selection, in this particular design is more important the fluid thermal conductivity. While the fluid heat capacity has a direct effect on heat ; the thermal conductivity influences two aspects. On one hand the conv is inversely proportional to kfluid, and typically the sensibility is greater than the one of heat (mainly because heat is smaller than conv , see figure 3). On the other hand, with a single phase design, the temperature at the bottom channel wall must be checked, because can be higher than the corresponding saturation one, leading to boiling even if fluid bulk temperature is far from saturation, and this fact will depend mainly of fluid thermal conductivity (i.e. convection coefficient).

Water Pc/( Pc)water /( ) water cond/(cond)water heat/(heat)water

(P constant)

Ammonia H2O+NH3 H2O+EG 0.29 0.42 1.75 0.29 0.65 1.67 1.24 1.32 1.75 1.24 1.15 1.10 3.77 4.39 1.00 3.77 2.10 1.71

H2O+PG 4.73 5.31 1.00 4.73 2.30 1.86

Acetone 2.18 5.40 1.00 2.18 2.32 4.06

GALDEN XCELTM HT130 500 3.89 8.01 1.00 3.89 2.83 6.50 13.73 31.65 1.00 13.73 5.63 5.00

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

heat/(heat)water
( constant)

conv/(conv)water

Table IV: Qualitative effect of the working fluid in some merit figures.

4.4

Optimization

From the table, perhaps the better option would be the mixture ammonia/water. The variation in the parameter cond/(cond)water for the ammonia and its solution is only due to material compatibility, that precludes the use of copper, with better conductivity than aluminium (this last compatible wit ammonia). This ratio does not take into account the necessary increase in MHS bottom wall thickness in order to compensate the higher pressurization. In the fluid selection is very important the aspect of compatibility between fluid and MHS material. Normal criterion for compatibility defines it as excellent when corrosion ratios are less than 2 mils per year. Applied to a microchannel, this number means that half a fin can be corrode in one year. Therefore it is needed to perform special analysis for corrosion inhibitors and to study the long-term fluid stability in a hostile environment (mainly radiation during ten or fifteen years of expected life). For this work two fluids are considered as appropriate for the application, without a deep compatibility analysis: the water/ammonia mixture

With the model described above, the MHS geometry can be optimized, for a given fluid and hot spot size. The optimization criteria can be based on minimum thermal resistance for given allowable pressure drop (or pumping power) or minimum pressure drop for a given thermal resistance. Figures 4 to 7 show some examples of the optimization plots that can be obtained. From analysis can be selected an optimum geometry, but manufacturing method can limit the possible geometries.

0.12 Thermal resistance (K/W) 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0 50 100 150 a (microns) 200 250 300
100 kPa (1 branch) 50 kPa (1 branch) 25 kPa (1 branch) 100 kPa (2 branch) 50 kPa (2 branch) 25 kPa (2 branch)

Fig. 4: Example of possible optimization with a simple model. Effect of splitting the channels (1 or 2 branches). Influence of the allowable pressure drop (equivalent to mass flow).

Per instance in our first design was selected electroerosion as the method for microchannel manufacturing. Based in previous experience with normal aluminium alloys it was expected to obtain fin thickness around 70 microns and depths about 400 microns. However tests showed that because the high thermal properties of the selected alloy (and lower mechanical ones) the minimum thickness was around 110 microns (figure 8). Also the channel width was driven by available filament diameters. For the second model with improved performance was selected for manufacturing a micro milling process. In this case the channel depth was increased and the fins were thinner; however the channel width increased (because the milling tool thickness).

1000

Fig. 7: Example of possible optimization with simple models. General plot showing thermal resistance isocontours as a function of the channel width and aspect ratio, for a given fin thickness and pressure drop. Hyperbolae correspond to manufacturing constraints, such as limited fin aspect ratio (4 can be obtained by electroerosion in aluminium and 87 with micromilling).

P (kPa)

100
H:3 (1 branch) H:3 (2 branch) H:4 (1 branch) H:4 (2 branch)

10 0 50 100
a (microns)

150

200

250

Fig. 5: Example of possible optimization with simple models. Effect of split the channels with varying channel aspect ratio, for constant thermal resistance of 0.08 K/W.

Fig. 8: Electroerosion method, filament of 0.1 mm. Fin deformations as a function of its thickness, from left to right 70, 90 and 100 microns (microphotographs obtained by TEKNIKER).

MHS MODELS

Along the project were developed three different models, named MHS-1, 2 and 3. Follow a short description for each one. Typical values for the spreaders are summarized in the Table V.
Fig. 6: Example of possible optimization with simple models. The shadowed area shows the interest zone. It is at the right side of the minimum in order to avoid the sharp thermal resistance increase on the left. Final channel width will be a compromise between performance and manufacturing.

5.1

MHS-1 Visualized priming process and to check flow uniformity and bubble absence inside the MHS. To test manufacturing procedures. 9

The objective of this model was:

To test hydraulic models To test and tune the test bench The model had a glass cover, and because it the inlet/outlet was located in its bottom part, increasing its thickness and worsening its thermal resistance. The size was higher than the requirements (Table V). The union of the different parts was done by gluing and by pressure fasteners (figure 9).

5.2

MHS-2
Fig. 10: MHS-2. Prototype of microchannel heat spreader 2.

This was the first prototype aimed to thermal performance. The microscale zone was similar to MHS-1, with small differences in the inlet and outlet sections. The microchannel manufacturing was also made by electroerosion and the union of the two components (upper and lower cover) was made with friction stir welding (figure 10).

5.3

MHS-3

Based on the previous experience, was made a new MHS aiming to improve pressure drop and heat transfer characteristics. Main differences with the previous ones was the higher channel aspect ratio, obtained by the change of the manufacturing procedure from electroerosion to micromilling; and a redesign of the inlet/outlet manifolds (figure 11).
Fig. 11: MHS-2 and MHS-3.

MHS-1
Size (w/o connectors) Type a (microns) H (b/a) Hf (wf/a) 50x50x23.2 split 130 3.1 0.8

MHS-2
37x29x7.2 split 130 3.1 0.8

MHS-3
41x29x7.7 split 145 6.6 0.6

Table V: Geometrical definition for MHS 1 to 3.

TEST BENCH

Fig. 9: MHS-1. Visualization model.

For testing the MHS models was necessary to develop a test bench. In this rig a key component was the heater, this element represents the hot component and must be able to put a uniform heat flux on the MHS greater than 150 W/cm2, equivalent to a power of 450 W. Other aspect that required special attention was the characterization of the thermal interface material (TIM). These topics are extended in the following paragraphs. 10

6.1

General rig description 6.2 Heater description A hydraulic loop that is composed by a deionised water1 reservoir, a pump discharging in a pressurized damping tank, a filter, a tap, the flow rotameter, then the inlet measurement section, the MHS, the outlet section measurement and the return to the water reservoir closing the loop. An electrical autotransformer, the electrical power measurement zone, and the heater. The heater consists in a copper block, shaped in such way that a uniform heat flow is obtained at the top, in the MHS contact area (figure 14). Inside the block there are three thermal cartridges. Two heaters were built along the project; the first one was used with MHS-1 and MHS-2 and it was fitted with 500 W (1x300 W and 2x100 W cartridges); the second one was used in MHS-3 and it was able to deliver up to 700 W (1x300 W + 2x 200 W) in order to obtain the target of 450 watts evacuated in the MHS (heat losses resulted in 30 % and 20 % of the electrical power, depending of heater thermal isolation). The heater is fitted on a ceramic base with a four columns structure, which presses the MHS against the hot surface by means of a plate and screws on the columns. The entire heater is isolated aiming to reduce convective heat losses.

The test bench (figure 12) consists in:

Fig. 12: Test bench. General view.

The measurement module consists in: Pressure: differential between inlet/outlet and absolute at inlet. Temperature: 2 thermocouples in the fluid at inlet, 2 thermocouples at outlet, 8 (10 for TIM characterisation) thermocouples in the heater. Volumetric flow
Fig. 14: Numerical model of the heater. Can be seen the three holes for the thermal cartridges and the upper pedestal, where thermocouples will be installed. On the top, the MHS will be fitted.

Fig. 13: Test bench. The inlet and outlet sections where enthalpy increase and pressure drop are measured are shown in conjunction with the heater and MHS (not visible because isolation layers and the fixing structure)

Water was used during test because simplicity and security.

In the pedestal (the prismatic upper part), the heater has eight 0.5 mm holes at two levels: 1.5 mm and 6.5 mm below the MHS interface. These holes with a depth varying from 6 to 10 mm allow the measurement of temperature and its extrapolation to the interface in order to estimate the junction temperature. This value is corrected with a heat flux dependent correlation, accounting for the distortions in the temperature field caused by the thermocouples. This correction was obtained from numerical computation. 11

Also, the temperature gradient and therefore estimation for the heat flux at the interface surface can be extracted from the thermocouple readings.

6.3

Thermal Interface Material (TIM)

In a real application, the MHS will be mounted on the hot component with a TIM in order to reduce the contact thermal resistance. With the experimental set-up, the value measure for the thermal resistance is: set up = MHS + TIM . Then it is necessary to know the TIM in order to make a realistic estimation for the MHS thermal resistance. For simplicity, as TIM material was chosen a commercial thermal paste. The thermal paste was applied manually on both interface surfaces. The rig was mounted repeatedly in order to characterize the variations induced in the paste application by the manual procedure. An aluminium adaptor with two pieces was fitted to the heater, and the thermal gradients in the upper and lower part were obtained and extrapolated to the interface, allowing plotting the ratio T/Q ( TIM ). Figures 15 to 17 show the aluminium blocks, the estimation of temperature jump across the interface and the global results for the TIM thermal resistance. In figure 17 have been plotted two lines, the lower one is the nominal value provided by the TIM manufacturer and it corresponds to a 0.003 inch thickness. This value is based in the long term operation, after several cycles and more than 200 working hours. The upper line corresponds to the expected resistance during the first working hours. The dots correspond to experimental data obtained for the different rig assemblies. As can be seen the dispersion in the temperature range of 350 to 380 K goes from 0.04 to 0.10. After the dilemma of which value must be selected for TIM, it was decided to take the minimum one, that subtracted from set up will provide a conservative approach giving a greater value for MHS . In the following, TIM = 0.03 K/W is selected, therefore when MHS thermal resistance is presented, it corresponds to the set-up value minus 0.03.

(a)

(b)
Fig. 15a & b: Aluminium blocks for TIM calibration. Can be seen the holes for the thermocouples used for obtaining the T across the TIM.
470 460 450 440 430 420 410 400 390 380 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

Fig. 16: Example of temperature variation across the aluminium blocks. On the left the lower block, on the right the upper one. T in the TIM corresponds to the temperature jump in X equal to zero.
0.14 TIM Thermal Resistance (K/W) 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 300 350 400 TIM Temperature (K) 450

Fig. 17: TIM characterization.

12

Total Pressure drop (Bar)

The selected value for the TIM agrees with standard material used in space industry, such as HiThermTM005 (0.028 K/W).

0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.000 MHS-1 MHS-2 MHS-3 MHS-1 th. MHS-2 th. MHS-3 th.

EXPERIMENTAL RESUTS

The principal results from MHS-1 were the checking of the hydraulic design and the manufacturing techniques (figure 18).

0.005

0.010 0.015 Mas flow (kg/s)

0.020

0.025

Fig. 20: Pressure drop in the prototypes. As in 19 but with the associated rig pressure drop subtracted.

0.14 Thermal resistance (no TIM), (K/W) 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06

MHS-2

Test-1
0.04 0.02 0.00 0.000

Test-2 Theoretical Target

0.005 0.010 0.015 Mass Flow (kg/s) 0.020 0.025

Fig. 21: MHS-2 Thermal resistance (after subtracting 0.03 K/W for the TIM). Fig. 18: Visualization result from MHS. The picture shows the instant when channels are just filled.

MHS-2 provided the expected thermal performance, obtaining thermal resistances of 0.06 K/W, with a water flow of 0.018 kg/s and a pressure drop of 0.42 Bar. The test were done up to a heat flux of 120 W/cm2 (figures 19 to 21).

MHS-3, as expected from the improvement in the design, reduced the thermal resistance and pressure drop to very low levels. Values of 0.04 K/W with a pressure drop of 0.09 Bar and 0.02 kg/s were obtained with heat fluxes up to 180 W/cm2 (figures 19, 20 and 22).

0.14 0.12

MHS-3. Test 1

0.7
Total Pressure drop (+rig) (Bar)

0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.000

MHS-1 MHS-2 MHS-3 MHS-1 th. MHS-2 th. MHS-3 th.

Thermal resistance (w/o TIM), (K/W)

0.10 0.08 0.06

Test 1. 190 W
0.04

Test 1. 350 W Theoretical Target

0.02 0.00 0.000

0.005

0.010 0.015 Mass Flow (kg/s)

0.020

0.025

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

Mas flow (kg/s)

Fig. 19: Pressure drop in the prototypes. The values include the additional pressure drop due to inlet and outlet measurement sections.

Fig. 22: MHS-3 Thermal resistance (after subtracting 0.03 K/W for the TIM). Comparing with figure 21, the modifications incorporated to the design leaded to a considerable improvement.

Table VI resumes the main results. They present the junction temperature for the nominal heat flux and fluid temperature inlet; and the maximum heat flux that it is possible 13

to evacuate without overpass the maximum junction temperature. The authors want to express their gratitude to Mr. Alberto Jos Herrero and Mr. Sabino Azcarate from the Fundacin TEKNIKER, responsible of the manufacturing of the MHSs and the people from LOKTER, responsible for the welding process. We are in debt with the people from the Laboratorio de Mecnica de Fluidos (LAMF) from the E.T.S. de Ingenieros Aeronuticos, Universidad Politcnica de Madrid. This work has been partly funded by the Spanish Ministry of Industry through PROFIT.

Mass flow (kg/s) MHS-2 MHS-2 MHS-3 MHS-3 0.019 0.019 0.020 0.020

DP (kPa) 50 50 10 10

MHS
0.06 0.06 0.04 0.04

Tinlet (C) 60 60 60 60

Q (W) 450 650 450 1000

q (W/cm2) 150 225 150 325

Tj (C) 87 100 78 100

Table VIa. MHS performance without TIM

Mass flow (kg/s) MHS-2 MHS-3 MHS-3 0.019 0.020 0.020

DP (kPa)

MHS
+

Tinlet (C)

Q (W)

q (W/cm2)

Tj (C)

TIM
0.09 0.07 0.07

50 10 10

60 60 60

450 450 575

150 150 175

101 92 100

Table VIb. MHS performance with TIM (0.03 K/W)

REFERENCES

CONCLUSIONS

In relation with the possibility to evacuate the high heat fluxes in space, the study has shown that it is possible to do that. Referring to the design methodology, though CFD codes can be used for design, they are time consuming. It is better to use them in: Getting correlations as a virtual test bench For the detailed analysis of particular configurations And of course, for final performance verification The optimization process is better performed using simple engineering models, able to represent the effect of the multiple parameters involved in the design, and without expensive computations. This work has shown the possibility to use these conventional engineering tools in the design of heat exchangers based on microchannels. Also some manufacturing techniques have been tested. These manufacturing methods can be applied in space, where the MHS cost is insignificant, but new strategies must be considered for massive production. But there are yet some open points in relation with the working fluid and material compatibility, thus as the long term stability of the fluid in the space environment.

1. Clemens J.M. Lasance, Robert E. Simons; Advances in High Performance Cooling for Electronics; Electronic Cooling. Vol. 11, N 4, Nov 2005 2. G.C. Birur et al. Micro/nano spacecraft thermal control using a MEMS-based pumped liquid cooling system. 3. J. Lee and I. Mudawar. Two phase flow in high-heat-flux micro-channel heat sink for refrigeration cooling applications Part I & II. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 48 (2005). 4. J. Leemaster and S. Malamut. Electronic component cooling using surfactant solutions flow through micro-channels. 5. H.Y. Zhang et al. Single phase liquid cooled microchannel heat sink for electronic packages. Applied Thermal Engineering 25 (2005) 6. B. Horacek, K.T. Kiger and J. Kim. Single nozzle spray cooling heat transfer mechanisms. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. (2004) 7. K. Goodson. Microscale thermal engineering of electronic systems. Proceedings of Rohsenow Symposium on Future Trends of Heat Transfer. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 2003. 8. A.G. Pautsch and T.A: Shedd. Spray impingement cooling with single- and multiple-nozzle arrays. Part I: Heat transfer data using FC-72. International 14

Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 48 (2005) 9. S. Launay, V. Sartre and M. Lallemand. Experimental study on silicon micro-heat pipe arrays. Applied Thermal Engineering 24 (2004) 10. S. Launay et al. Investigation of a wire plate micro heat pipe array. International Journal of Thermal Sciences 43 (2004) 11. L. Lin, R. Ponnappan, J. Leland. High performance miniature heat pipe. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 45 (2002) 12. Yu.F. Maydanik. Loop Heat Pipes. Applied Thermal Engineering 25 (2005) 13. Thermacore 14. . R.R. Riehl. Proposed loop heat pipe experiment to be tested at the International Space Station7th IHPS 2003. 15. Capillary thermal fluid loops (Astrium brochure) 16. F. Fantozzi. S. Filippeschi, E. Latrofa Miniature Pulsated Loop Thermosyphon for Destop. 17. S. Khandekar et al. Thermofluiddynamic study of a flat plate closed loop pulsating heat pipes. 18. Capillary Thermal Fluid Loops. EADSASTRIUM brochure 19. Miniature loop heat pipe for electronic cooling 20. L.L. Vasiliev. Heat pipes in modern heat exchangers. Applied Thermal Engineering 25 (2005) 21. Setish C. Mohapatra; An overview of liquid coolant for electronic cooling; Electronic Cooling, Vol. 12, N 2; May 2006

15