0
Research Papers

Mechanical and Heat Transfer Performance Investigation of High Thermal Conductivity, Commercially Available Polymer Composite Materials for Heat Exchange in Electronic Systems

[+] Author and Article Information
Peter Rodgers

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The Petroleum Institute,
P.O. Box 2533,
Abu Dhabi, UAE
e-mail: prodgers@pi.ac.ae

Valerie Eveloy

Mem. ASME
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The Petroleum Institute,
P.O. Box 2533,
Abu Dhabi, UAE
e-mail: veveloy@pi.ac.ae

Antoine Diana

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The Petroleum Institute,
P.O. Box 2533,
Abu Dhabi, UAE
e-mail: adiana@pi.ac.ae

Ismail Darawsheh

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The Petroleum Institute,
P.O. Box 2533,
Abu Dhabi, UAE
e-mail: isfdarawsheh@pi.ac.ae

Fahad Almaskari

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The Petroleum Institute,
P.O. Box 2533,
Abu Dhabi, UAE
e-mail: falmaskari@pi.ac.ae

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF THERMAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS. Manuscript received June 12, 2016; final manuscript received December 14, 2016; published online April 4, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Ziad Saghir.

J. Thermal Sci. Eng. Appl 9(3), 031008 (Apr 04, 2017) (13 pages) Paper No: TSEA-16-1170; doi: 10.1115/1.4035942 History: Received June 12, 2016; Revised December 14, 2016

The thermal, mechanical, and morphological characteristics of three selected commercially available, injection-moldable, high thermal conductivity (20–32 W/m K), polyimide 66 (PA66) polymer composites from two vendors are characterized for possible heat exchange applications in electronic equipment. The fillers are found to consist of 10 μm diameter, 120–350 μm long fibers, made of carbon in two composites, and a hybrid combination of essentially carbon, oxygen, and silicon in the third composite. Fiber weight loading ranges from 63% to 69%. The hybrid, high-length fiber-reinforced material overall displays superior mechanical properties (i.e., ultimate tensile, flexural and impact strengths, and flexural modulus) compared with the other two carbon-filled composites. For the hybrid-filled and one carbon-filled material (both having a thermal conductivity of 20 W/m K), good agreement between mechanical property measurements and corresponding vendor data is obtained. For the material having the highest vendor-specified thermal conductivity (i.e., 32 W/m K) and weight filler fraction (i.e., 69%), mechanical properties are up to 37% lower than corresponding vendor data. The heat transfer rates of parallel plate, cross-flow air–water heat exchanger prototypes made of the three PA66 materials are comparable to that of an aluminum prototype having the same geometry. Based on the combined heat transfer and mechanical property characterization results, the hybrid, long fiber-filled PA66 polymer composite appears to have the best combination of mechanical and heat transfer characteristics, for potential use in electronics heat exchange applications.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Heat exchanger prototypes: (a) PA66 P1 injection molded/machined prototype, (b) PA66 P2 injection molded/machined prototype, (c) PA66 P3 injection molded/machined prototype, [42] (d) polyethylene injection molded prototype, and (e) aluminum machined prototype [42]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Parallel plate cross-flow gas–liquid heat exchanger geometry [42]: (a) water-side, (b) air-side, and (c) isometric view (Note: all dimensions in millimeter)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic geometry of test specimen for the tensile strength and modulus characterization of three commercially available PA66 thermally enhanced polymer composites. (Note: Injection molding direction aligned with the specimen longitudinal axis. Geometry defined in Table 4.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

SEM images of three commercially available thermally enhanced PA66 polymer composites morphologies: (a) P1, (b) P2, and (c) P3 (Note: Polymer composite materials P1, P2, and P3 defined in Table 1. Test specimens prepared by cross sectioning for injection molded flexural test parts.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Thermogravimetric analysis of three commercially available thermally enhanced PA66 polymer composites. (Note: Polymer composite materials P1, P2, and P3 defined in Table 1.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Measured tensile strength–strain curves for three commercially available PA66 thermally enhanced polymer composites: (a) P1, (b) P2, and (c) P3. (Note: Polymer composite materials P1, P2, and P3 and corresponding batch sizes defined in Tables 1 and 3, respectively.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Distribution of measured standard deviations in tensile strength for three commercially available PA66 thermally enhanced polymer composites. (Note: Polymer composite materials P1, P2, and P3 and corresponding batch sizes defined in Tables 1 and 3, respectively.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of present tensile strength measurements with corresponding vendor specified for three commercially available PA66 thermally enhanced polymer composites. (Note: Polymer composite materials P1, P2, and P3 and corresponding batch sizes defined in Tables 1 and 3, respectively. Error barsfor present measurements represent ± one standard deviation.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Measured flexural strength–strain curves for three commercially available PA66 thermally enhanced polymer composites: (a) P1, (b) P2, and (c) P3. (Note: Polymer composite materials P1, P2, and P3 and corresponding batch sizes defined in Tables 1 and 3, respectively.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparison of experimentally measured heat transfer rates for three commercially available thermally enhanced PA66 polymer composite materials, nonthermally enhanced LDPE polymer, and aluminum prototype heat exchangers. (Note: Polymer composite materials P1, P2, and P3 defined in Table 1.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Comparison of present measurements and corresponding vendor specified flexural strength and flexural modulus for three commercially available PA66 thermally enhanced polymer composites: (a) flexural strength and (b) flexural modulus. (Note: Polymer composite materials P1, P2, and P3 and corresponding batch sizes defined in Tables 1 and 3, respectively. Error bar represents ± one standard deviation.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Distribution of measured standard deviations for flexural strength and flexural modulus for three commercially available PA66 thermally enhanced polymer composites: (a) flexural strength and (b) flexural modulus. (Note: Polymer composite materials P1, P2, and P3 and corresponding batch sizes defined in Tables 1 and 3, respectively.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of present measurements and corresponding vendor specified Izod impact strength for three commercially available PA66 thermally enhanced polymer composites: (a) distribution of measured standard deviations for impact strength and (b) impact strength measurement and comparison with vendor reference data. (Note: Polymer composites P1, P2, and P3 and corresponding batch sizes defined in Tables 1 and 3, respectively. Present, and P2 and P3 vendor measurements, were characterized as per Izod ISO 180 for unnotched specimen. P1 vendor employed Charpy ISO 179 for unnotched specimen, with a reported value of 7 kJ/m2. Error bars represent ± one standard deviation.)

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