0
Research Papers

Onboard Device Encapsulation With Two-Phase Cooling

[+] Author and Article Information
S. J. Young

General Dynamics Mission Systems,
Bloomington, MN 55431

D. Janssen, E. A. Wenzel, B. M. Shadakofsky

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Minnesota,
Minneapolis, MN 55455

F. A. Kulacki

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Minnesota,
Minneapolis, MN 55455
e-mail: kulacki@me.umn.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF THERMAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS. Manuscript received August 4, 2016; final manuscript received May 19, 2017; published online August 29, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Gamal Refaie-Ahmed.

J. Thermal Sci. Eng. Appl 10(2), 021002 (Aug 29, 2017) (13 pages) Paper No: TSEA-16-1217; doi: 10.1115/1.4037130 History: Received August 04, 2016; Revised May 19, 2017

Onboard liquid cooling of electronic devices is demonstrated with liquid delivered externally to the point of heat removal through a conformal encapsulation. The encapsulation creates a flat microgap above the integrated circuit (IC) and delivers a uniform inlet coolant flow over the device. The coolant is Novec™ 7200, and the electronics are simulated with a resistance heater on a 1:1 scale. Thermal performance is demonstrated at power densities of ∼1 kW/cm3 in the microgap. Parameters investigated are pressure drop, average device temperature, heat transfer coefficient, and coefficient of performance (COP). Nusselt numbers for gap sizes of 0.25, 0.5, and 0.75 mm are reduced to a dimensionless correlation. With low coolant inlet subcooling, two-phase heat transfer is seen at all mass flows. Device temperatures reach 95 °C for power dissipation of 50–80 W (0.67–1.08 kW/cm3) depending on coolant flow for a gap of 0.5 mm. Coefficients of performance of ∼100 to 70,000 are determined via measured pressure drop and demonstrate a low pumping penalty at the device level within the range of power and coolant flow considered. The encapsulation with microgap flow boiling provides a means for use of higher power central processing unit and graphics processing unit devices and thereby enables higher computing performance, for example, in embedded airborne computers.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Kandlikar, S. , Garimella, S. , King, D. , Colin, S. , and King, M. , 2013, Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow in Minichannels and Microchannels, 2nd ed., Butterworth-Heinemann, Waltham, MA.
Shah, R. K. , and London, A. L. , 1978, Laminar Flow Forced Convection in Ducts (Advances in Heat Transfer), Suppl. 1, Academic Press, New York.
Thome, J. R. , 2004, “ Boiling in Microchannels: A Review of Experiment and Theory,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 25(2), pp. 128–139.
Thome, J. R. , 2006, “ State-of-the-Art Overview of Boiling and Two-Phase Flows in Microchannels,” Heat Transfer Eng., 27(9), pp. 4–19. [CrossRef]
Yarin, L. O. , Mosyak, A. , and Hetsroni, G. , 2009, Fluid Flow, Heat Transfer and Boiling in Micro-Channels, Springer, Berlin. [CrossRef]
Saha, S. K. , and Celata, G. P. , 2011, “ Thermofluid Dynamics of Boiling in Microchannels—Part I,” Advances in Heat Transfer, Vol. 43, Y. I. Cho and G. A. Greene , eds., Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 77–159. [PubMed] [PubMed]
Kandlikar, S. , 2012, “ Thermofluid Dynamics of Boiling in Microchannels—Part II,” Advances in Heat Transfer, Vol. 43, Y. I. Cho and G. A. Greene , eds., Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 159–208.
Kandlikar, S. G. , 2012, “ History, Advances, and Challenges in Liquid Flow and Flow Boiling Heat Transfer in Microchannels: A Critical Review,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 134(3), p. 034001. [CrossRef]
Lagus, T. P. , and Kulacki, F. A. , 2012, “ Two-Phase Heat Transfer and Bubble Characteristics in a Microchannel Array,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 134(7), p. 071502. [CrossRef]
Thome, J. R. , Dupont, V. , and Jacobi, A. M. , 2004, “ Heat Transfer Model for Evaporation in Microchannels—Part I: Presentation of the Model,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 47(14), pp. 3375–3385. [CrossRef]
Dupont, V. , Thome, J. R. , and Jacobi, A. M. , 2004, “ Heat Transfer Model for Evaporation in Microchannels—Part II: Comparison With the Database,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 47(14), pp. 3387–3401. [CrossRef]
Szczukiewicz, S. , Magnini, M. , and Thome, J. R. , 2014, “ Proposed Models, Ongoing Experiments, and Latest Numerical Simulations of Microchannel Two-Phase Flow Boiling,” Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 59, pp. 84–101. [CrossRef]
Saha, S. K. and Celata, G. P. , 2015, Critical Heat Flux in Flow Boiling in Microchannels (Springer Briefs in Thermal Engineering and Applied Science), Springer, New York. [CrossRef]
Bar-Cohen, A. , Geisler, K. J. L. , and Rahim, E. , 2008, “ Pool and Flow Boiling in Narrow Gaps—Application to 3D Chip Stacks,” Fifth European Thermal Sciences Conference, G. G. M. Stoffels, T. H. van der Meer, and A. A. van Steenhoven, eds., Eindhoven, The Netherlands, May 18–22. http://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=68-8iI8AAAAJ&citation_for_view=68-8iI8AAAAJ:IjCSPb-OGe4C
Bar-Cohen, A. , and Rahim, E. , 2009, “ Modeling and Prediction of Two-Phase Microgap Channel Heat Transfer Characteristics,” Heat Transfer Eng., 30(8), pp. 601–625. [CrossRef]
Rahim, E. , Bar-Cohen, A. , and Ali, I. A. , 2012, “ Two-Phase Microgap Cooling of a Thermally-Simulated Microprocessor Chip,” 13th IEEE Intersociety Conference on Thermal and Thermomechanical Phenomena in Electronic Systems (ITherm), San Diego, CA, May 30–June 1, pp. 1090–1105.
Bar-Cohen, A. , Sheehan, J. R. , and Rahim, E. , 2012, “ Two-Phase Thermal Transport in Microgap Channels—Theory, Experimental Results and Predictive Relations,” Microgravity Sci. Technol., 24(1), pp. 1–15. [CrossRef]
Alam, T. , Lee, P. S. , and Jin, L.-W. , 2014, Flow Boiling in Microgap Channels: Experiment, Visualization and Analysis (Springer Briefs in Thermal Engineering and Applied Science), F. A. Kulacki , ed., Springer, New York. [CrossRef]
Janssen, D. D. , Dixon, J. M. , Young, S. J. , and Kulacki, F. A. , 2013, “ Flow Boiling in Short Narrow Gap Channels,” ASME Paper No. HT2013-17437.
Young, S. J. , Kulacki, F. A. , Janssen, D. D. , and Dixon, J. M. , 2013, “ Advanced Electronics Cooling Technology (AECT),” DARPA/MTO, Arlington, TX, Contract No. N66001-11-C-4113.
Janssen, D. , Dixon, J. M. , Young, S. J. , and Kulacki, F. A. , 2015, “ Cooling Multiple in Line Chip Pairs Via Flow Boiling,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 137(11), p. 111501. [CrossRef]
Solovitz, S. A. , and Mainka, J. , 2011, “ Manifold Design for Micro-Channel Cooling With Uniform Flow Distribution,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 133(5), p. 051103. [CrossRef]
Cornwell, K. , and Kew, P. A. , 1993, “ Boiling in Small Parallel Channels,” Energy Efficiency in Process Technology, P. A. Pilavachi , ed., Elsevier Applied Science, London, pp. 624–638. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Conceptual conformal encapsulation at the device level with coolant flow

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Heat transfer coefficients with flow field visualization in flow boiling in a microgap of 300 and 1000 μm [18]. qeff″  = wall heat flux.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Overall heat transfer coefficient versus exit quality with regression fit [21]. Hollow data points are for a multiple chip pairs [20].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Nusselt numbers in terms of Reynolds and boiling numbers for d = 0.36 mm and three in-line pairs of heaters [19] (solid points). Results for a single pair of heaters [20] are shown for comparison.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

(a) Computer-aided design rendering of the encapsulation showing smooth roof line transitions. (b) Section A-A view of the inlet port with smooth transition to 1 mm DIA in plane flow to inlet manifold. (c) Detail of channelized inlet manifold. Bypass flow blocker is at the upper right.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Manifold configurations (CF) with flow blockers and flow directions shown. (a) CF-1: channelized inlet and outlet with 80% bypass area blocked. (b) CF-2: channelized inlet and open outlet with 80% bypass area blocked. (c) CF-3: channelized inlet and open outlet with 33% bypass area blocked. (d) CF-4: Open inlet and outlet with 80% bypass are blocked.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Flow management system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Chip temperature with subcooled inlet flow. d = 0.5 mm. Manifold configuration CF-1: channelized inlet and outlet manifolds. Q is coolant volume flow in L/min. Bypass area flow blocking = 80%.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Chip temperature with subcooled inlet flow. CF-2: channelized inlet and open outlet manifolds. Q is the coolant volume flow in L/min. Bypass flow blocking = 80%.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Chip temperature with subcooled inlet flow. d = 0.5 mm. Manifold configuration CF-3: channelized inlet and open outlet manifolds. Q is coolant volume flow in L/min. Bypass area flow blocking = 33%.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Chip temperatures with subcooled inlet flow. d = 0.5 mm. Manifold configuration CF-4: open inlet and outlet manifolds. Q is coolant volume flow in L/min. Bypass area flow blocking = 80%.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Heat transfer coefficients with subcooled inlet flow. d = 0.5 mm. Manifold configuration CF-1: channelized inlet and outlet manifolds. Q is coolant volume flow in L/min. Bypass area flow blocking = 80%.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Heat transfer coefficients with subcooled inlet flow. d = 0.5 mm. Manifold configuration CF-2: channelized inlet and open outlet manifolds. Q is coolant volume flow in L/min. Bypass area flow blocking = 80%.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Heat transfer coefficients with subcooled inlet flow. d = 0.5 mm. Manifold configuration CF-3: channelized inlet and open outlet manifolds. Q is coolant volume flow in L/min. Bypass area flow blocking = 33%.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Heat transfer coefficients with subcooled inlet flow. d = 0.5 mm. Manifold configuration. CF-4: open inlet and open outlet manifolds. Q is coolant volume flow in L/min. Bypass area flow blocking = 80%.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Chip temperature for d = 0.75 mm. Manifold configuration CF-1: channelized inlet and outlet. Q is volume flow in L/min. Bypass area flow blocking = 80%. Last entry in each legend corresponds to d = 0.5 mm.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Chip temperature for d = 0.25 mm. Manifold configuration CF-1: channelized inlet and outlet. Q is volume flow in L/min. Bypass area flow blocking = 80%. Last entry in each legend corresponds to d = 0.5 mm.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Power input versus chip temperature. CF-1. Ti = 25 °C.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Reduced Nusselt number versus heater chip temperature. d = 0.5 mm. Manifold configurations CF-1 and CF-4. Ti = 25 °C. G = 100–500 kg/m2 s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Heat transfer coefficients, pressure drop and COP. d = 0.5 mm. Manifold configurations CF-1, CF-2, CF-3, and CF-4. Ti = 25 °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