Use of Superposition To Describe Heat Transfer

Use of Superposition
to Describe Heat Transfer

from Multiple Electronic Components
Gerald Recktenwald
Portland State University
Department of Mechanical Engineering
gerry@me.pdx.edu
Convection from PCBs

These slides are a supplement to the lectures in ME 449/549 Thermal Management Measurements
and are c 2006, Gerald W. Recktenwald, all rights reserved. The material is provided to enhance
the learning of students in the course, and should only be used for educational purposes. The
material in these slides is subject to change without notice.
The PDF version of these slides may be downloaded or stored or printed only for noncommercial,
educational use. The repackaging or sale of these slides in any form, without written consent of
the author, is prohibited.
The latest version of this PDF file, along with other supplemental material for the class, can be
found at www.me.pdx.edu/~gerry/class/ME449. Note that the location (URL) for this web
site may change.
Version 0.81 May 30, 2006
Convection from PCBs page 1

Overview
• Overview of the Physics

• Experimental Data
• Superposition and the adiabatic
heat transfer coefficient
• Sample Calculation

Heat Transfer Modes
Vin, Tin
radiation
convection
conduction in the board
• conduction within devices and attached heat sinks

• conduction in the multilayer, composite PCB
• forced and natural convection from devices and heat sinks
• radiation between devices and adjacent boards
• radiation between the fins of a heat sink

Geometrical Complexity
B1 B2 B3
L1 S12 L2 S23 L3
• multiple length scales: large boxes and small components

• irregularly shaped flow passages with blockages
• three-dimensional flow patterns around heat sinks and in the wake of discrete
components
• internal board configurations may change in the field

Fully-Developed Flow
Hydrodynamically fully-developed flow:
• velocity field is independent of the flow direction

dp
• = constant
dx
Thermally fully-developed flow:
• flow is hydrodynamically fully-developed

• heat transfer coefficient is independent of the flow direction
Flow over arrays of blocks in a channel exhibits fully-developed behavior after the third or
fourth row of blocks

Laminar, Transitional, and Turbulent Flow
Industrial equipment tends to be turbulent flow
• little or no noise constraint

⇒ high flow velocities
• high power consumption equipment
Office equipment tends to have transitional flow
• equipment must be relatively quiet

⇒ lower flow velocities

Natural Convection Applications
Some equipment uses natural convection only
• low power devices

⇒ battery power makes fan use “expensive”
• portable test equipment
• optimize internal heat conduction paths
conduct heat to external case
use of heat pipes in lap-top computers

Mixed Convection
Buoyancy effects can be present in a forced convection flow

Recirculation in Plan View
device with heat sink

Recirculation in Elevation View
Experiments by Sparrow, Niethammer and Chaboki [3]
H
b
Nu = 1.00 1.46 1.49 1.30 1.21 1.15 t

Nufd
Re = 3700 b–t = 1
H 5

Thermal Wakes (1)
Thermal wake for a flush heat source

Thermal Wakes (2)
Three-dimensional representation of a wake, T (x, y)

Unmixed Temperature Profile
Flow tends to organize into
• By-pass flow above the devices

• Array flow around the devices
bypass flow, above blocks
array flow, between blocks

By-pass and Array Flow (1)
By-pass flow
• Higher velocity than array flow

• Streamlines are topologically simple
• Relatively higher turbulent fluctuation at interface between by-pass flow and top of
blocks. Flow may still be considered unsteady laminar for many applications.
• Gross flow features may be predicted with CFD.

By-pass and Array Flow (2)
Array flow
• Lower velocities than by-pass flow

• Streamlines are topologically complex: many recirculation zones
• Very hard to accurately predict the details because of small scale flow features.

Hierarchy of Analysis Strategies
In order of increasing effort:
• hand calculation of energy balance

• use of heat transfer correlations for board-level analysis
• resitive network of entire enclosure
• Conduction modeling in the board: fluid flow is treated only as a convective boundary
coefficient.
• PCBCAT layer-based models
• Full 3-D CFD models of conjugate heat transfer

Example: Fan-Cooled Enclosure (1)
disk power supply

drive

Fan-Cooled Enclosure (2)
ΣQ1 m1
ΣQ2
m2
ΣQ4 ΣQ3 m3
X
Q1 = ṁ1cp (To,1 − Ti,1)
P
Q1
⇒ To,1 = Ti,1 +
ṁ1cp
P
Q2
To,2 = Ti,2 +
ṁ2cp
P
Q3
To,3 = Ti,3 +
ṁ3cp

Fan-Cooled Enclosure (3)
P
What contributes to Qi?
• Power dissipation of devices

• Heat loss directly through the cabinet to the ambient
• Heat gain/loss through the PCB to an adjacent channel containing other board
Perhaps individual control volumes should be connected into a thermal network.

Board-Level Energy Balance
Tm(x)
Tout
Tin
x
•
min
Q1 Q2 Q3
A B C D E
• 3D effects
fan wake
non-uniform inlet
blockage by obstacles including heat sinks
• Channel by-pass and unmixed temperature profile

——————-

Heat Transfer Correlations for Board-Level Analysis
m• 1
h, Ta

Heat Transfer Correlations for Board-Level Analysis
• Energy balance only gives the air

temperature.
• We need values for thermal resistances to R values for a high
estimate junction temperatures. performance CPU:
Rsa ∼ 0.4 W/C

• Thermal resistance of heat sink comes Heat
Sink
Rim ∼ 0.1 W/C
from heat sink manufacturer. (But
does that test data apply to your Case (cover)
Die Rjc ∼ 0.3 W/C
Substrate
configuration?) Q
Rjb
• Other convective resistances are estimated

Rba
from heat transfer coefficients.
• General correlations for heat transfer
coefficients from arbitrary devices on a
PCB do not exist.

Resistive Network Models
SINDA:
http://www.webcom.com/~crtech/sinda.html
http://www.indirect.com/user/sinda/
See also Thermal Computations for Electronic Equipment, by Gordon Ellison [2]

Conduction Modeling (1)
Internal resistance can be obtained from finite-element analysis of conduction heat

transfer inside the device. This data is usually supplied by the device manufacturer,
because only they know the details of the internal construction.
m• 1
h, Ta

Conduction Modeling (2)
• Need heat transfer coefficient at all fluid-solid interfaces.

• Analysis is a standard procedure with most FEM packages.
• Practical limit to the geometric detail
• Analysis time is short compared to model building time.

CFD Modeling (1)
m• 1

CFD Modeling (2)
• Significant investment in model development

=⇒ CFD model run time is often short compared to model building time.
• Detailed solution still requires significant computing requirements
• Momentum equations are nonlinear
• Turbulence models
• Inlet vents and fans need to be modeled.
• Practical limit to the geometric detail
• CFD packages for electronic cooling
FlothermTM http://www.flomerics.com/
IcePackTM http://www.fluent.com/

Experimental Data
• flush mounted heaters

• Ribs
• Arrays of blocks
• arrays of “heater” devices

Correlations
Flow over a flat plate

a b
Nu = C Re Pr
Which length scales to use?
Proper application requires
• geometric similarity
• dynamic similarity
• thermal similarity

Heat Transfer Coefficients
Vin, Tin
s
Experimental Procedure
1. Adjust flow rate

2. Set power level of each block
3. Wait for thermal equilibrium
4. Measure temperature of each block
5. Compute heat transfer coefficient

Which heat transfer coefficient?
Based on inlet temperature:

Qconv,i/Ai
hin,i =
Tb,i − Tin
Based on local, mean fluid temperature:

Qi/Ai
hm,i =
Tb,i − Tm,i
Pi
j=1 Qj
Tm,i = Tin +
ṁcp
Based on adiabatic wall temperature:

Qconv,i/Ai
had,i =
Tb,i − Tad,i

Superposition Principle (1)
Consider flow in a tube with an arbitrary axial variation in heat input.

ξ ∆x
u(r)
x
R
r
hydrodynamically
fully-developed flow
qw''(x)
Energy Equation „ «
∂T k ∂ ∂T
ρcpu(r) = r
∂x r ∂r ∂r
Boundary conditions
˛ ˛
∂T ˛˛ ∂T ˛˛ 00
= 0 (symmetry) k = qw (x)
∂r r=0
˛ ∂r r=R
˛

Superposition Principle (2)
General solution is
x+
R
Z
+ + 00
Tw,ad(x ) − Tin = g(x − ξ) qw (ξ) dx
k 0
where g(x+) is the superposition kernel function

2
x+
` ´
+
X exp −γm
g(x ) = 4 + 2 A
m
γm m
For a single heated patch this reduces to
+ Q +
Tw,ad(x ) − Tin = g(x − ξ)
4ṁcp

Interpretation of Kernel Function (1)
∆x
r
.
y m
Tw,ad(x)
Tm
∆Tm
Tin
∆Tm ∆Tm
y
Tin T(y) Tin Tm Tw,ad Tin Tw,ad

Interpretation of Kernel Function (2)
Energy balance gives increase in mean fluid temperature
Q
∆Tm =
ṁcp
Solve equation defining Tw,ad for g(x+)
+ Tw,ad(x+) − Tin
g(x − ξ) =
Q/(4ṁcp)
Tw,ad(x+) − Tin
= 4
∆Tm

Application to PCB Heat Transfer (1)
3
2
m=1
n=1 2 3 4
The adiabatic temperature of a block is

the temperature it attains when it is has
zero internal heat generation.
Note that if no blocks are heated, then Tad,i = Tin. Remember that “adiabatic” in this
context means unheated, not insulated.

The temperature difference between block i and the inlet air can be decomposed as
Tb,i − Tin = (Tb,i − Tad,i) + (Tad,i − Tin) (1)
Tb,i = average surface temperature

of heated block i.
Tb,i − Tad,i = temperature rise due to self-
heating
Tad,i − Tin = temperature rise due to heat
inputs from other heated
elements

The adiabatic temperature rise of block i due to heat input from all blocks is
n
X Qj ∗
Tb,i = Tin + gi,j (2)
j=1
ṁcp
Interpret as sum of two major contributions

n
X Qconv,j ∗ Qconv,i ∗
Tb,i − Tin = gi,j + g (3)
j=1, j6=i
ṁcp ṁcp i,i
| {z }
self-heating
| {z }
upstream contribution
Temperature rise due to self-heating is rise due to self-heating alone is

Qconv,i
Tb,i − Tad,i = (4)
had,iAi

Equating the right hand side of Equation (4) with the second term on the right hand side
of Equation (3) gives
Qconv,i Qconv,i ∗
= g (5)
had,iAi ṁcp i,i
Thus,
∗ ṁcp
gi,i = (6)
had,iAi
∗
Equation (6) shows that gi,i and had,i are intrinsically related. This is no accident since
∗
both gi,i and had,i are derived from measurements in which only block i is heated.

Substituting Equation (5) into Equation (3) gives
n
X Qconv,j ∗ Qconv,i
Tb,i − Tin = gi,j + (7)
j=1, j6=i
ṁcp had,iAi
∗
With measured values of gi,j and had,i, Equation (7) uses superposition to compute the
effect of any power distribution on the temperature of each block in the domain. All that
∗
remains is a procedure for determining gi,j from the experimental data.

Measuring had for a 3 Block Experiment (1)
Measure had,i for i = 1 and Tad,i for i = 2, 3:
1. adjust flow rate

2. turn heat on for block 1
3. turn off heat for block 2 and block 3
4. wait for thermal equilibrium
5. measure temperatures of all three blocks

Write out Equation (2) for i = 2, j = 1:

Q1 ∗ Q2 ∗ Q3 ∗
Tb,2 = Tin + g2,1 + g2,2 + g (8)
ṁcp ṁcp ṁcp 2,3
Since Q2 = Q3 = 0 in this experiment, the preceding equation reduces to

Q1 ∗
Tb,2 = Tin + g (9)
ṁcp 2,1
∗
Solving for g2,1 gives
∗ Tb,2 − Tin
g2,1 = only block 1 is heated (10)
Q1/(ṁcp)
Because only block 1 is heated, Tb,2 − Tin is the temperature rise of block 2 due to heat
input at block 1.

Define
Twake,i,j = temperature of block i when only block j is heated.
The term “wake” is suggestive of the mechanism of heating: Twake,i,j > Tin because
block i is downstream of block j .
Thus, when only block 1 is heated, the value of Tb,2 is Twake,1,2, and Equation (10) is
∗ Twake,2,1 − Tin
g2,1 = (11)
Q1/(ṁcp)
Remember that the simplification that leads from Equation (8) to Equation (11) is valid
because only block 1 is heated.
∗
Similar calculation (from same experiment) gives g3,1 .

Repeat measurements to obtain data for following table
Measured Temperatures
Heat Inputs Block 1 Block 2 Block 3
Q1 0 0 Tself,1 Twake,2,1 Twake,3,1
0 Q2 0 Twake,1,2 Tself,2 Twake,3,2
0 0 Q3 Twake,1,3 Twake,2,3 Tself,3

Anderson and Moffat Correlation (1)
top view side view
row
Sz Lz H
number
Sx 8
7
6 B
5
4
3
Lx 2
x 1
z
flow direction
Anderson and Moffat [1] found
• g ∗(x) was related to correlation for had

• no interaction between columns
• fully-developed flow after third row

For fully-developed region
g ∗ = 1 + β1 exp (−α1N ) + β2 exp (−α2N )
For first two rows
g1∗
˘ ¯
∗
= max 0.8 g , 1
∗
˘ ¯
∗
g2 = max 0.95 g , 1

Dimension analysis gives a relationship for maximum possible turbulence fluctuations in

the channel «(1/3)
−∆P −
„
0 row (H B)
ũmax = 0.82 Um
ρ Lx
where Um is the velocity in the bypass region
VH
Um =
H−B

For fully-developed region
g ∗ = 1 + β1 exp (−α1N ) + β2 exp (−α2N )
For first two rows
g1∗
˘ ¯
∗
= max 0.8 g , 1
∗
˘ ¯
∗
g2 = max 0.95 g , 1
0
α1 = 0.31 ũmax + 1.91
0
α2 = 0.098 ũmax + 0.19
„ «
1 ṁcp/A
β1 = −1
1.13 32.2 ũ0max + 14.4
β2 = 0.13 β1

Example Calculation (1)
parameter value
H 0.0214 m
B 0.0095 m
Lx 0.0375 m
Sx 0.0502 m
Lz 0.0465 m
Sz 0.0592 m
Table 1: Geometrical parameters for the example calculations.
3
ρ = 1.185 kg/m cp = 1005 J/(kg K)
2
V = 7.1 m/s − ∆Prow = 7.78 N/m

2
A = 0.00334 m
Um = 12.8m/s
−2
ṁ = 1.06 × 10 kg/s per row
0
ũmax = 2.44 m/s
α1 = 2.6685
α2 = 0.4298
β1 = 29.5387
β2 = 3.8400

row Q (W )
8 12
7 18
6 14
5 7
4 2
3 13
2 11
1 15
Table 2: Power dissipated by modules in the example caluclation.

The temperature rise in row n due to heat dissipated by the module in row 1 is
“ ” Q1 ∗
T e,n − Tin = g1 (n − 1)
1 ṁ cp
“ ”
n g1∗ (n − 1) T e ,n − Tin (C)
1
8 1.000 1.40
7 1.033 1.45
6 1.158 1.62
5 1.351 1.89
4 1.654 2.32
3 2.214 3.10
2 4.438 6.22
1 27.503 38.56
Table 3: Temperature rise due to heat dissipated in row 1.

The temperature rise in row n due to heat dissipated by the module in row 2 is
“ ” Q2 ∗
T e,n − Tin = g (n − 2)
2 ṁ cp 2
“ ”
n g2∗ (n − 2) T e ,n − Tin (C)
2
8 1.227 1.26
7 1.375 1.41
6 1.604 1.65
5 1.964 2.02
4 2.629 2.70
3 5.270 5.42
2 32.660 33.58
1 0 0

The temperature rise in row n due to the heat dissipated by row three is
“ ” Q3 ∗
T e,n − Tin = g (n − 3)
3 ṁ cp
“ ”
n g ∗ (n − 3) T e ,n − Tin (C)
3
8 1.448 1.76
7 1.689 2.05
6 2.068 2.51
5 2.768 3.36
4 5.547 6.74
3 34.378 41.77
2 0 0
1 0 0

n T e ,n − Tin (C)
8 57.6
7 72.2
6 54.9
5 30.8
4 18.2
3 50.3
2 39.8
1 38.6
Table 6: Total temperature rise for modules.

100
90
80
70
Temperature (C)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
row number

References
[1] A. M. Anderson and R. J. Moffat. The adiabatic heat transfer coefficient and the superposition kernel function: Part 1–data
for arrays of flatpacks for different flow conditions. Journal of Electronic Packaging, 114(1):14–21, 1992.
[2] Gordon N. Ellison. Thermal Computations for Electronic Equipment. Robert Krieger Publishing Co., Malabar, FL, 1989.
[3] E. M. Sparrow, J. E. Niethammer, and A. Chaboki. Heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of arrays of rectangular
modules encountered in electronic equipment. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 25(7):961–973, 1982.

Use of Superposition To Describe Heat Transfer

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Use of Superposition To Describe Heat Transfer

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Use of Superposition

to Describe Heat Transfer

Convection from PCBs

Version 0.81 May 30, 2006

Convection from PCBs page 1

• Overview of the Physics

Convection from PCBs page 2

conduction in the board

• conduction within devices and attached heat sinks

Convection from PCBs page 3

• multiple length scales: large boxes and small components

Convection from PCBs page 4

Hydrodynamically fully-developed flow:

• velocity field is independent of the flow direction

Thermally fully-developed flow:

• flow is hydrodynamically fully-developed

Convection from PCBs page 5

Industrial equipment tends to be turbulent flow

• little or no noise constraint

Office equipment tends to have transitional flow

• equipment must be relatively quiet

Convection from PCBs page 6

Some equipment uses natural convection only

• low power devices

Convection from PCBs page 7

Buoyancy effects can be present in a forced convection flow

Convection from PCBs page 8

device with heat sink

Convection from PCBs page 9

Experiments by Sparrow, Niethammer and Chaboki [3]

Nu = 1.00 1.46 1.49 1.30 1.21 1.15 t

Convection from PCBs page 10

Thermal wake for a flush heat source

Convection from PCBs page 11

Three-dimensional representation of a wake, T (x, y)

Convection from PCBs page 12

Flow tends to organize into

• By-pass flow above the devices

bypass flow, above blocks

array flow, between blocks

Convection from PCBs page 13

bypass flow, above blocks

array flow, between blocks

• Higher velocity than array flow

Convection from PCBs page 14

bypass flow, above blocks

array flow, between blocks

• Lower velocities than by-pass flow

Convection from PCBs page 15

In order of increasing effort:

• hand calculation of energy balance

Convection from PCBs page 16

disk power supply

Convection from PCBs page 17

Convection from PCBs page 18

• Power dissipation of devices

Perhaps individual control volumes should be connected into a thermal network.

Convection from PCBs page 19

Convection from PCBs page 20

Convection from PCBs page 21

Convection from PCBs page 22

• Energy balance only gives the air

Rsa ∼ 0.4 W/C