2218 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 65, NO.
6, JUNE 2018
Thermal Analysis of High-Average Power
Helix Traveling-Wave Tube
P. Srikrishna , Talur Chanakya, R. Venkateswaran, P. Raja Ramana Rao, and S. K. Datta
Abstract — The thermal simulation using ANSYS was car-
ried out for estimating the maximum temperature and the
temperature distribution in a high-average power broad-
band helix traveling-wave tube (TWT). The simulation was
first carried out independently for the subassemblies such
as the slow-wave structure, the output coupler, and the
depressed collector; and the combined effect on the overall
temperature inside the TWT was estimated subsequently.
The simulation was carried out using several options of
thermal interface resistances such as 100% contact and 50%
contact, apart from considering various structural configu-
rations, and an optimal thermal management solution was
evolved for the device under consideration.
Index Terms — ANSYS, depressed collector, helix
traveling-wave tubes (TWTs), power dissipation, slow-wave
structure (SWS), thermal boundary conditions for TWT,
thermal contact resistance, thermal simulation.
I. I NTRODUCTION
H ELIX traveling-wave tube (TWT) is popularly used as
the microwave power amplifier in civil and military
communication systems. The main elements of a TWT are
as follows.
1) Electron Gun: Usually a convergent type for the forma-
tion of a cylindrical electron beam.
2) Slow-Wave Structure (SWS): Helix with support rods
provide a continued interaction of the electron beam
with the radio frequency (RF) wave propagating on the
structure.
3) Attenuator Coating and Sever Sections: For isolating the
input and output sections and thus providing oscillation
free stable operation.
4) Focusing System: Properly designed periodic permanent
magnet profile is used for focusing the electron beam
throughout the interaction region of the tube.
5) Input and Output RF Coupler: For the proper coupling
of signal into the device and out of the device with
minimum loss.
Manuscript received October 10, 2017; revised December 10, 2017;
accepted December 19, 2017. Date of publication January 11, 2018; date
of current version May 21, 2018. The review of this paper was arranged
by Editor D. K. Abe. (Corresponding author: P. Srikrishna.)
The authors are with the Microwave Tube Research and Develop-
ment Centre, Defence Research Development Organization, Jalahalli,
Bengaluru 560013, India (e-mail: srikrishna@mtrdc.drdo.in; rajarama-
narao@gmail.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TED.2017.2786941
0018-9383 © 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
6) A depressed collector to collect the spent beam after
the interaction process. A large portion of the power is
dissipated in the collector [1]–[4].
The heat dissipation in the SWS is one of the important
factors that determine the average output power and affect the
stability and reliability of the helix TWT. During the operation
of TWT, the helix heats up due to electron interception and RF
losses. Typical helix temperatures are less than 350 °C. For
this assembly, being in vacuum no convection is applicable,
the radiation effects can be conservatively neglected in com-
parison with the rate of heat transferred by conduction from
the helix through the support rods to the outer barrel. At high
helix temperature, ohmic losses increases and degradation
of RF performance of the TWT takes place. To improve
the thermal conduction inside SWS, beryllia support rods
are chosen over APBN rods so that the device can operate
under continuous wave (CW) condition without increasing
its temperature beyond the permissible values. The thermal
conductivity of the beryllia support rods at near room temper-
ature is 206 W/m/K, whereas APBN rods have the thermal
conductivity of 20 W/m/K. Use of beryllia support rods will
thus enhance the thermal conduction between helix and the
support rods and subsequently between the support rods to
the barrel of the SWS. The major problem for heat transfer in
the helix-rod bundle is the thermal resistances of the interfaces
between the helix and support rods and between the support
rods and the barrel [5]. The temperature drops across the
interfaces are extremely dependent on the pressure applied
to the interface and the surface finishes of the materials in
contact. Due to the large thermal drops at the support rod
interfaces, the helix and support rod structures in high-power
helix TWTs must be assembled using techniques that minimize
the thermal interface resistances. In the TWT considered in
this paper, the helix-rod bundle is pressure fitted inside the
barrel of SWS. The average power handling capability of a
TWT depends on how well the heat is conducted away to
the baseplate. Thus the thermal management becomes one
of the thrust areas for the CW tubes. The beam is dumped
in the collector after interaction in the SWS. In this paper,
around 1400 W of power is dissipated in the collector [6].
Using a two-stage depressed collector with a special cooling
arrangement to handle the heat the thermal management has
been carried out.
This paper discusses thermal simulation using ANSYS
to estimate the maximum temperature and temperature
distribution of a high-average power broadband helix TWT
SRIKRISHNA et al.: THERMAL ANALYSIS OF HIGH-AVERAGE POWER HELIX TWT
Fig. 1. Details of the SWS.
SWS, output coupler and depressed collector individually and
combined effect on the overall temperature inside the TWT.
II. T HERMAL S IMULATION
A. Slow-Wave Structure Thermal Analysis With 100%
Area of Contact for the Pressure Fitted Helix-Rod Bundle
and Barrel
A 3-D model of SWS with helix, support rod, segment, pole
piece, and spacer is modeled in the ANSYS. The details of
the model of the SWS are shown in Fig. 1. In this analysis
it is considered that support rod touches the barrel. Support
rods do not have contact with the segment as the support
rods are azimuthally 60° away from the segment. In this
analysis, to begin with interface between helix to support
rod and support rod to barrel assembly was assumed to have
100% (perfect) contact. The various details of the SWS shown
in Fig. 1 show that the segments are azimuthally away from
the rod by 60°. Hence, segments do not directly contribute in
the heat transfer process. This analysis has been carried out for
both dc interception heat load and RF conductivity loss on the
SWS structure. The structure is modeled with pure tungsten
helix, beryllia support rods, and cupronickel segments. When
the TWT is driven to saturation the maximum allowable
interception current (also known as body current or helix
current) with helix was 10 mA. The TWT is operated at beam
voltage of 10 kV and beam current of 400 mA. The total
power dissipation due to body current will be 100 W. Power
is lost when electrons are intercepted by the circuit and also by
RF losses within the tube. This RF loss or the attenuation (α)
is derived from the PRFloss = PRF (1 − exp(−2αp)), where
PRFloss takes into account all the losses in the structure. PRF is
the power flow in the structure and “ p” is the helix pitch. The
total RF loss is calculated as 70 W. Thermal load due to the
RF loss is obtained from the RF analysis of the device. The
RF analysis usually considers the effects of surface roughness
and the resistivity of the helix material (tungsten) at elevated
temperature of around 300 °C. The temperature is considered
from experience as a design figure during the RF design of
the TWT as it is expected that the helix would be maintained
around this temperature through suitable thermal management
2219
Fig. 2. SWS heat load variation with distance from output coupler.
techniques. The effects of these losses in the RF analysis
follow earlier work of Datta et al. [7] and Rao and Datta [8].
Thus, the thermal analysis of SWS has been carried out with
combined thermal heat loads of dc interception due to 10-mA
helix current and RF conductive loss which corresponds to
a ∼170 W power dissipation on the helix turns. This load is
applied on the last 30 mm of the helix from the output coupler
end for the thermal analysis.
The helix has been modeled for each turn so as to match
the heat load pattern provided in Fig. 2. The heat load was
applied as volumetric heat generation for each turn of the helix.
In this paper, the volumetric heat loads were applied as for
convenience of application over each turn. The convenience
arises from the fact that each turn was modeled as separate
volume and these volumes could be easily identified by
identifiers/names in ANSYS as against surfaces which were
not named. Even with this simplification the maximum loss
of accuracy will be only 3 °C when the surface heat loads
of helix are applied as volumetric heat loads. This can be
illustrated as follows.
Thermal resistance of conduction for a hollow cylinder is
given by, Rcyl = (ln (d2 /d1 )/2 × π × khelix × L) where d2
is the outer diameter of helix in millimeters, d1 is the inner
diameter of helix in millimeters, l is the length of the helix
turn in meters, and khelix is the thermal conductivity of helix
in watt per meter per Kelvin.
The diameters of the helix are as shown in Fig. 3 and with
L being conservatively (minimum) set to width of the helix
tape of 0.64 mm. The maximum of length can be set as value
of the pitch of the helix. However, the longer the length lesser
will be the thermal resistance. The thermal conductivity of the
˜
helix (tungsten) is taken as 150 W/m/K (from Fig. 6[9]). Rcyl
has a maximum value of 0.35 °C/W for the least length of the
cylinder (turn of helix). The maximum heat load occurring at
the last turn of the helix is 9 W (from Fig. 2) will result in
temperature rise of over 3 °C due to conduction through the
thickness of the tape.
The TWT under consideration is designed to operate in
an ambient temperature of 55 °C. SA 120° portion of the
bottom of the pole pieces of the barrel were assigned a
specified temperature boundary condition of 85 °C as only
this portion of the SWS contacts the baseplate through which
conduction cooling occurs. The 85 °C temperature boundary
2220
Fig. 3. Dimensional details of the helix turn.
Fig. 4. Temperature plot of initial design with 100% contact.
condition is used because the conduction cooling is provided
at the baseplate by way of forced air convection (with air
inlet temperature being dependent on the ambient temper-
ature of 55 °C). Hence, an approximate temperature value
of 85 °C was assigned to refine the thermal design of the
SWS assembly. The rest of the exterior surfaces of the barrel
and RF arm assemblies were applied a convective boundary
condition of heat transfer coefficient 5 W/m2 /K at 55 °C
ambient temperature (which is the ambient temperature in
which TWT is intended to operate) to simulate the effect of
natural convection as shown in Fig. 1.
The analysis was carried out for the initial design with sup-
port rods of beryllia of length 97. For this model, the analysis
revealed a temperature of 840 °C at the last turn of the helix as
shown in Fig. 4. A closer look at the plot revealed that the high
temperature occurred only at the last turn of the helix prior to
the pin. This unacceptably high temperature was because the
rod length was lesser resulting in a portion of the last turn of
the helix having no contact with the support rods thus having
no conduction path for heat transfer. Hence, the length of the
rods was modified (increased by 1.5 mm) to 98.5 mm so as to
ensure adequate contact of all the turns of the helix for proper
conduction heat transfer.
The thermal conductivity of the various parts of the SWS is
summarized in Table I. Here, the thermal conductivity values
listed were constant with respect to temperature and the values
of the thermal conductivities were chosen with an approximate
estimate of the likely temperatures each material (component)
will attain.
B. Depressed Collector
As the collector collects the spent beam a considerable
amount of heat is dissipated in the collector inner surfaces.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 65, NO. 6, JUNE 2018
TABLE I
T HERMAL C ONDUCTIVITY OF VARIOUS PARTS OF SWS
TABLE II
H EAT L OADS AT C OLLECTOR S TAGES
Hence, a thermal analysis of the collector subassembly has
been carried out for various combinations of heat loads at
different locations of the stages as shown in Table II. With
no RF drive, no energy is extracted from the beam and so all
of the electrons entering the collector have the same energy
that they had when leaving the electron gun. When the RF
drive is applied to the tube, energy in varying amounts is
extracted from electrons during the interaction of the RF wave
on the circuit with the beam. In a helix TWT, some electrons
lose as much as 30%–40% of their initial energy. Hence,
case-1 corresponds to saturation condition of the TWT, case-2
corresponds to linear region operation of the TWT, and case-3
corresponds to no RF drive condition.
The heat loads were applied as heat fluxes in the respective
areas as illustrated in Table II. The base of the collector was
assigned a specified temperature boundary condition of 80 °C.
The model of the sectional view of the collector is shown in
Fig. 5. The analysis has been done for isolation ceramics of
both alumina and beryllia materials. The thermal conductivity
values for the various constituent materials are given in
Table III. In this analysis as well the thermal conductivity
values listed were constant with respect to temperature with
the values chosen corresponding to the likely temperatures
envisaged in the assembly. Also, as the ceramic to metal joints
are formed by brazing a 100% perfect thermal contact has been
assumed for the thermal analysis.
The temperature plots for the alumina and the beryllia
ceramic for the collector for case-1 operating condition are
shown in Figs. 6 and 7. Only the temperature plots of case-1,
the most operated condition of TWT, and the one which
SRIKRISHNA et al.: THERMAL ANALYSIS OF HIGH-AVERAGE POWER HELIX TWT
TABLE III
T HERMAL C ONDUCTIVITY OF VARIOUS PARTS OF C OLLECTOR
Fig. 5. Solid model of the collector.
Fig. 6. Temperature distribution in collector for alumina (case-1).
manifests the highest temperatures have been provided for
comparison between the two ceramics. However, the results
of all the three cases for both ceramics have been summarized
in Tables IV and V. As the thermal conductivity of the beryllia
ceramic is an order of magnitude higher than the alumina
ceramic the beryllia ceramic provided substantial reduction
in temperature across various locations within the collector
subassembly. Hence, the design was modified with beryllia as
the isolation ceramic for the TWT development.
2221
Fig. 7. Temperature distribution in collector for beryllia (case-1).
TABLE IV
M AXIMUM T EMPERATURE W ITH A LUMINA C ERAMIC
TABLE V
M AXIMUM T EMPERATURE W ITH B ERYLLIA C ERAMIC
C. Slow-Wave Structure Thermal Analysis With 50%
Area of Contact for the Pressure Fitted Helix-Rod Bundle
and Barrel
To obtain better estimate of the temperature distribution
within the SWS assembly and subsequently in the near full
model of the TWT, the temperature dependent thermal conduc-
tivity values have been incorporated in the analysis as shown
in Fig. 8˜[9].
Also to get more realistic estimate of the temperatures
within the SWS, the thermal interface resistance between the
helix and the support rod as well as between the support rod
and the barrel was included in the analysis of SWS. This was
included as the metal to ceramic (support rod) joint in either
side of the rod was achieved by pressure fitting the helix-
rod bundle into the barrel and not by brazing of the joint.
The analysis was carried out for 50% area of contact between
support rods and the barrel at outer side and helix in the inner
side to account for the degradation of conduction due to lesser
area of contact.
2222
Fig. 8. Temperature dependent thermal conductivity values.
Fig. 9. Details for the modeling strategy for 50% contact of support rod.
The modeling strategy adopted in this case was to reduce
the thermal conductivity of the support rod material (beryllia)
by half to match the area reduction by 50% at either side
of the support rod. This is adopted as the contact conductance
values which could be assigned in ANSYS could not be ascer-
tained with accuracy for the geometry under consideration.
The thermal resistance of conduction through a cuboid (refer
Fig. 9), Rcuboid = t/(kA), where A = w× H and k = thermal
conductivity of the cuboid (in the case under consideration
the support rod). Rcuboid of the rod will double in case of
only 50% of area contacts the either side of the support rod.
The doubling of the resistance was accounted in the model
by reducing thermal conductivity of the rod to 50% of the
actual value (refer Fig. 8 curve pertaining to beryllia with
50% contact), whereas the dimensions of the rod was retained
the same. In this way the thermal contact resistance which is
inevitable when the helix-rod bundle is pressure fitted inside
the barrel was accounted in the thermal analysis.
The modified design of increased support rod length was
analyzed with temperature varying thermal conductivity val-
ues. The modified design showed a maximum temperature
of 335.5 °C at the helix but not in the last turn as shown
in Fig. 10. When the effect of the reduced contact was
also incorporated the modified design showed a maximum
temperature of 390.5 °C at the helix as shown in Fig. 11.
Though the maximum temperature location was the same
for the SWS assembly from the simplified analysis discussed
earlier the magnitude of the temperature was substantially at
the helix slightly away from the output RF pin. However,
the magnitude of the actual temperature is expected to be
slightly lesser than the one shown in both Figs. 10 and 11
for the two reasons. Primary reason being, the reduction
in thermal conductivity was established both in the radial
direction (which is intended) as well as in the axial direction
(which is unintended). The axial spreading of the heat over
the rod was also diminished due to the 50% reduction in the
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 65, NO. 6, JUNE 2018
Fig. 10. Temperature plot of modified design with 100% contact with
temperature varying thermal conductivity.
Fig. 11. Temperature plot of modified design with 50% contact with
temperature varying thermal conductivity.
thermal conductivity in axial direction as well. The secondary
reason being the conservative neglect of radiation heat transfer
which becomes dominant as the temperatures become larger.
This leads to higher temperature being predicted than actual.
D. Combined Thermal Loads
After the subassembly level thermal analysis, a near com-
plete model of the TWT was analyzed for further refinement
of the temperature estimates. Here, the complete collector
assembly and the output section of the SWS along with the
entire baseplate (aluminum) and the top plate (copper cover
which was also aluminum in the subassembly level analysis)
over the collector was modeled as shown in Fig. 12. The
analysis in this case was carried out with temperature varying
thermal conductivity and reduced (50%) interface contact of
the support rod. The thermal conductivities for two materials—
platinum (whose property is constant over a wide temperature
range) which connects the helix to RF p-i-n and aluminum
alloy which forms the baseplate (where the temperatures do
not exceed 150 °C) was taken as a constant at the respective
temperature ranges.
The TWT is of conduction cooled type. That is the TWT
is to be cooled by attaching a heat sink with fans beneath
its baseplate. In this TWT, the collector area of the baseplate
up to the output coupler was only to be mounted with a heat
sink and the rest of the portion—from the SWS to electron
gun was to be cooled without a heat sink beneath by forced
air (air exiting from the heat sink) convection. Hence, the
effect of the forced air convection with the heat sink beneath
the collector and without the heat sink beneath SWS and gun
was modeled indirectly as heat transfer coefficient at given
SRIKRISHNA et al.: THERMAL ANALYSIS OF HIGH-AVERAGE POWER HELIX TWT
Fig. 12. Near full model of the TWT for the analysis.
bulk fluid (air) temperature. Thus the heat transfer coefficient
of 2900 W/m2 /K at bulk fluid temperature of 60.4 °C was
applied beneath collector and output coupler zone. Likewise,
a heat transfer coefficient of 50 W/m2 /K at bulk fluid tem-
perature of 65.8 °C was applied beneath rest of the SWS
and electron gun region. This approach was pursued to avoid
modeling of the entire heat sink and the fluid flow over the
heat sink. This saves the substantially large amount of mesh
of the FE model thus a finer detail can be modeled within
the TWT subassemblies—collector and SWS. The approach
of the boundary condition is as follows.
The energy balance (heat transfer) between the contacting
surfaces of the interface implies that the heat flux at the either
side of the interface is equal. Thus at the interface of the
baseplate of the TWT and the heat sink beneath the TWT,
the heat flux balance in the y-direction is given by
∂T
−k = q̇ = h overall × T
∂y
where
k thermal conductivity (W/m/K);
q̇ heat flux = heat load per unit area (W/m2 );
h overall overall heat transfer coefficient at the
interface;
T difference in temperature between
solid and fluid cooling the surface
(in this case the heat -sink surfaces)
(°C).
To estimate the overall heat transfer coefficient, the resis-
tances beneath the collector is to be ascertained as shown
in Fig. 13. Thermal contact conductance between the TWT
bottom surface and the top of the heat sink = h cc in W/m2 /K;
(value was to be taken for the aluminum to aluminum contact-
ing surfaces with the general contact pressure obtained while
fastening the TWT to the heat sink [10]).
Thermal resistance in °C/W due this contact = Rcont =
(1/ h cc ) × A B ; ( A B is the area beneath collector/SWS.)
Heat transfer coefficient due to forced air convection = h c
in W/m2 /K; (values taken from the heat sink testing/heat sink
design for the collector and from the forced convection heat
transfer correlations [10] for SWS and gun).
Thermal resistance beneath collector/SWS due to
convection = Rconv = (1/h c ) × As ; ( As is the surface
area of the heat sink under collector and the base area
beneath the SWS, respectively.)
2223
Fig. 13. Thermal resistances beneath the TWT baseplate.
Total thermal resistance in °C/W beneath the TWT sub-
assembly
Rtot = Rcont + Rconv .
Thus the overall heat transfer coefficient to be applied beneath
the TWT = h overall = 1/ (Rtot × A B ). The bulk fluid temper-
ature to be applied for the respective heat transfer coefficient
applied beneath the collector and SWS are estimated by the
energy balance between the air flowing through the heat sink
and the heat dissipated by the respective subassemblies
Q̇ = ṁ × C p × (To − Ti )
where
Q̇ heat dissipated by the sub-assembly (W);
ṁ mass flow rate of air in kilograms per
seconds (supplied by the fans attached to
the heat sink);
Cp =specific heat capacity of the air
(taken as 1005 J/kg/K);
Ti =inlet air temperature at the entry to heat
sink beneath the subassembly;
Tfluid = To =outlet air temperature at the exit of the
subassembly, which was taken as the bulk
fluid temperature for the convection in
this paper.
Thus the heat transfer coefficient applied for the near full
assembly analysis was calculated from the experimental value
obtained from the testing of the heat sink and the contact con-
ductance value was obtained from [10] for aluminum (base-
plate) to aluminum (heat sink). The heat sink for the TWT
cooling was individually designed after fluid flow simulation
and tested with resistance heaters. Hence, the effect of the heat
sink beneath the collector and the effect of the forced convec-
tion beneath the SWS and the electron gun was represented as
an effective heat transfer coefficient applied at the appropriate
location (under the baseplate) with the convection bulk fluid
temperature set as the outlet temperature (as against average
temperature) in order to be conservative. As the heat sink
2224
Fig. 14. Temperature plot of near full model without heat dissipation in
window ceramic.
surface area was not modeled and the heat transfer coefficient
is applied at the bottom of the baseplate, the heat transfer
coefficient calculated has a larger value to compensate for the
lack of the heat sink area. No other heat transfer coefficient
has been used in the analysis on the top or the other exposed
surfaces of the TWT as the heat transfer due to natural
convection at the other locations over the TWT are negligible
in comparison to the effect of the forced convection heat sink.
The temperature plot for the near full TWT model as
shown in Fig. 14 reveals that the temperatures in the collector
zone (170 °C) is much lesser than the temperatures was
predicted in the collector subassembly level analysis (398 °C
for beryllia ceramic). But the temperature in the SWS (helix) is
in reasonable agreement with the subassembly level analysis
carried out only SWS with specified temperature boundary
condition. For instance, the maximum temperature occurs at
the helix as 366 °C which is nearly the same as predicted in
SWS level analysis (390 °C) for the same material properties.
It is also needed to estimate the temperature at the RF window
of the coupler [11] as heat (though small in quantity) is
dissipated in very small volume. However, when the heat
load of 5 W at the RF window ceramic was considered as
a heat generation (0.18 W/mm3 ), the maximum temperature
of 490.5 °C was observed at the pin as shown in Fig. 15. But
even in this case the helix temperature remained almost the
same at 366 °C.
III. R ESULTS AND D ISCUSSION
The steady-state thermal analysis was carried out into
two stages: individual subassembly level and the full TWT
assembly level. The analysis at the subassembly level was
carried out with specified temperature boundary conditions.
These specified temperature boundary conditions were used
to investigate the thermal resistance across the subassembly to
refine the thermal design of the assemblies.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 65, NO. 6, JUNE 2018
Fig. 15. Temperature plot of near full model with heat dissipation in
window ceramic.
The results of the subassembly level analyses indicated the
necessary design modifications to be carried out. In the SWS
thermal analysis, the initial design with 97-mm support rod
length yielded a temperature of 840 °C at the last turn of the
helix which is certainly unacceptable for the working of the
TWT. The change was carried out by increasing the length of
the rod to 98.5 mm so as to provide conduction path to the
last turn. When the temperature varying thermal conductivity
was used for the analysis the SWS helix temperature went
up to 335.5 °C. When the subassembly level SWS analysis
was further refined by considering the reduced area of the
interface contact of the support rod the temperature at the
helix further increased to 390 °C. However, the unacceptably
high temperature of 840 °C was brought down by the increase
in the rod length. Likewise, in the collector thermal analysis
the alumina isolation ceramic resulted in a high temperature
of 568 °C for case-1 operating condition which was reduced
to a more reasonable temperature of 398 °C by use of higher
thermal conductivity beryllia as isolation ceramic.
After the design of the subassemblies have been modified
for thermal considerations and the design of the heat sink
finalized, the near full model of the TWT up to the output
section of SWS was analyzed with more realistic boundary
conditions beneath the collector and the SWS. The results
indicated a very good correlation with respect to maximum
temperature (366 °C) in SWS, whereas in the collector the
temperatures in the near full model 170 °C were substantially
lower than what was predicted in the subassembly level
model (398 °C). This reduction in the temperature in collector
is due to two important reasons. Primarily the material of the
top plate or the top cover over the collector in the near full
TWT model was changed to Oxygen Free High Conductivity
(OFHC) copper from the earlier material of aluminum alloy.
The secondary reason being the heat spreading (favourable)
effect of the thermally conducting aluminium baseplate in
SRIKRISHNA et al.: THERMAL ANALYSIS OF HIGH-AVERAGE POWER HELIX TWT
the axial direction. In the collector subassembly model the
conduction by the aluminum baseplate in the axial direction
of the TWT was not considered as the focus was more on
the internal thermal resistances in the collector assembly and
the modifications needed to reduce these resistances. However,
in the near full model the conduction of the aluminum base-
plate in the axial direction reduced the collector temperature.
Also in the near full model analysis the very small heat load
of 5 W in the RF window resulted in a very high temperature
of 490.5 °C in the window region. The window ceramic heat
load of 5 W makes the RF pin area to be hotter by nearly
300 °C (490.5 °C–194 °C). This observation was taken into
account for the design of a heat sinking path (conduction) for
the RF window to the baseplate.
However, the temperature at the helix for the near full model
in either case (with and without RF window heat load) at the
last few turns of the helix remained almost the same at 366 °C.
IV. C ONCLUSION
A steady-state thermal analysis was carried out to predict the
temperature distribution within the assembly of the TWT. This
analysis models the assemblies with most significant heat dis-
sipation. To begin with only subassembly level modeling was
carried to fine tune the thermal design of the subassemblies—
the collector and the SWS. The design modifications such as
change (increase) in rod length to reduce temperature of the
helix and the change in ceramic material in collector to higher
thermal conductivity were carried out. Also the top cover of
the collector was modified from aluminum to OFHC copper
to bring down the temperatures in the collector. The analysis
was fine tuned with temperature varying thermal conductivity
values for the materials and also by including the effect of the
thermal interface resistance due to reduced area of contact at
the support rods.
The near full TWT model was analyzed with more realistic
boundary conditions beneath each subassembly and improved
thermal conductivity and interface thermal resistance values.
In this case again only the most heat dissipating collector and
the output section of the SWS along with the RF window
assembly was modeled. However, all the areas of cooling (the
entire baseplate) were modeled. The effect of the heat sink
beneath the collector and output coupler and the effect of the
forced convection (by the air exiting the heat sink) beneath
the SWS and electron gun was modeled as an effective heat
transfer coefficient applied beneath the baseplate.
In the near full model with the heat dissipation in the
window ceramic the temperature at the RF window zone was
hotter by almost 300 °C. But with or without the RF window
heat load the temperature distribution remained the same in the
rest of the areas as the heat load at window ceramic is only
a fraction of the rest of the heat loads. However, the analysis
revealed that even for the small heat load at the RF window
a heat sink/conduction path is to be designed by way of a
metal (preferably aluminum) anchored to the baseplate to have
reasonable temperatures at the RF pin.
Though the maximum temperature of the helix did not vary
much from the subassembly level model to the near full model,
the collector maximum temperature predicted was much lower
2225
in the near full model. This is due to the design modification
of the collector top cover being changed from aluminum to
OFHC copper and due to the axial heat spreading due to
the inclusion of the aluminum baseplate throughout the TWT
length.
Also in the near full TWT model analysis without the RF
window heat load the maximum temperatures (especially in
the collector where substantial heat is dissipated) were within
reasonable limits due to the various design changes and refine-
ment in the analysis carried out. Thus the optimized (by way
of design modifications) structure evolved is being employed
in the development of the TWT.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank Dr. S. Kamath for his
constant encouragement and many valuable suggestions during
the studies.
R EFERENCES
[1] B. N. Basu, Electromagnetic Theory and Applications in Beam-Wave
Electronics. Singapore: World Scientific, 1996.
[2] L. Kumar, R. S. Raju, S. N. Joshi, and B. N. Basu, “Modeling of a
vane-loaded helical slow-wave structure for broad-band traveling-wave
tubes,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. ED-36, no. 9, pp. 1991–1999,
Sep. 1989, doi: 10.1109/16.34282.
[3] A. S. Gilmour, Principles of Traveling Wave Tubes. Washington, DC,
USA: Artech House, 1994.
[4] R. Crivello and R. W. Grow, “Thermal analysis of PPM-focused rod-
supported TWT helix structures,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 35,
no. 10, pp. 1701–1720, Oct. 1988, doi: 10.1109/16.7377.
[5] P. J. Rocci, “Thermal-structural reliability assessment of helix TWT
interaction circuit using finite element analysis,” in Proc. IEEE Nat.
Aerosp. Electron. Conf. (NAECON), vol. 2. May 1993, pp. 731–737,
doi: 10.1109/NAECON.1993.290849.
[6] P. R. R. Rao, T. Chanakya, S. K. Datta, S. Kamath, and L. Kumar,
“Thermal co-simulation of depressed collector of a TWT using CST
studio,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Vacuum Electron. Conf., Monterey, CA, USA,
Apr. 2014, pp. 151–152, doi: 10.1109/IVEC.2014.6857534.
[7] S. K. Datta, L. Kumar, and B. N. Basu, “A simple and accurate analysis
of conductivity loss in millimeter-wave helical slow-wave structures,”
J. Infr. Millim. Terahertz Waves, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 381–392, Apr. 2009,
doi: 10.1007/s10762-008-9455-5.
[8] P. Raja Ramana Rao and S. K. Datta, “Estimation of conductivity
losses in a helix slow-wave structure using eigen-mode solutions,”
in Proc. Int. Vacuum Electron. Conf. (IVEC), 2008, pp. 99–100,
doi: 10.1109/IVELEC.2008.4556452.
[9] J. A. King, Materials Handbook for Hybrid Microelectronics. Norwood,
MA, USA: Artech House Inc., 1988.
[10] Y. A. Cengel, Heat Transfer—A Practical Approach, 2nd ed. New York,
NY, USA: McGraw-Hill, 2003.
[11] R. Hemamalini, P. R. R. Rao, K. V. Rao, S. K. Datta, C. Bhattacharya,
and S. Kamath, “Thermal co-simulation of coaxial RF window and con-
nector of a TWT,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Vacuum Electron. Conf., Monterey,
CA, USA, Apr. 2014, pp. 259–260, doi: 10.1109/IVEC.2014.6857588.
P. Srikrishna received the B.E. degree in
mechanical engineering from Sathyabama
Engineering College, University of Madras,
Chennai, India, in 1996, and the M.E. degree in
mechanical engineering from the Indian Institute
of Science, Bengaluru, India.
He is currently a Scientist with the Microwave
Tube Research and Development Centre,
Defence Research and Development
Organisation, Bengaluru.
2226
Talur Chanakya received the B. Tech. degree
in electrical engineering from IIT Hyderabad,
Hyderabad, India, in 2012.
Since 2012, he has been a Scientist with
the Microwave Tube Research and Develop-
ment Centre, Defense Research and Develop-
ment Organisation, Bengaluru, India. His current
research interests include the computer-aided
design and the development of subassemblies
of helix traveling-wave tubes such as slow-wave
structures and magnetic focusing structures.
R. Venkateswaran received the M.Sc. degree
in physics from the University of Madras,
Chennai, India, in 1996, and the M.Tech degree
in laser and electro-optical engineering from
Anna University, Chennai, India, in 2002.
He is currently a Scientist with the Microwave
Tube Research and Development Centre,
Defence Research and Development
Organisation, Bengaluru, India.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 65, NO. 6, JUNE 2018
P. Raja Ramana Rao received the B.E. degree
in electronics and communication engineering
from V. R. Siddhartha Engineering College,
Nagarjuna University, Guntur, India, and the
M.S. degree in electronics engineering from
the Defence Institute of Advanced Technology,
Pune, India.
He is currently a Scientist with the Microwave
Tube Research and Development Centre,
Defence Research and Development
Organisation, Bengaluru, India.
S. K. Datta received the B.E. degree in electron-
ics and telecommunications engineering from
Bengal Engineering College, Calcutta University,
Kolkata, India, in 1989, and the M.Tech and Ph.D.
degrees in microwave engineering from the Insti-
tute of Technology, Banaras Hindu University,
Varanasi, India, in 1991 and 1999, respectively.
Since 1991, he has been a Scientist with
the Microwave Tube Research and Development
Centre, Defence Research and Development
Organisation, Bengaluru, India.